Summary
This memorandum and order from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York grants final approval of a class action settlement against Gerber Products Co. concerning alleged deceptive marketing of its infant formula. The court analyzes the settlement's adequacy under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e) and adjusts the plaintiffs' request for attorneys' fees and costs under Rule 23(h), finding the initial lodestar calculation excessive due to duplicative work and inflated hourly rates.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the proposed settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e)(2).
- Whether the attorneys’ fee award of $7,319,559 is reasonable.
- Whether the costs and service‑award requests should be granted.
Holdings
- The settlement is approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate.
- The court awards $7,319,559 in attorneys’ fees as reasonable after reductions.
- The court grants the $1,219,564.45 costs request in full and awards $10,000 service awards to each named plaintiff.
Key quotations
“The Court may award reasonable attorney’s fees . . . that are authorized by law or by the parties’ agreement.” (at *)
“The ratio of associate to partner hours on pretrial work typically reflects more associate than partner hours — often significantly more.” (at *)
Factual background
Consumers in New York and Florida purchased Gerber’s Good Start Gentle infant formula between 2011 and 2016 and alleged the company made false, deceptive, and unfair advertising claims that the product reduced allergy risk. The class action proceeded, obtaining class certification, defeating motions to dismiss and summary judgment, and ultimately negotiating a settlement providing $19.5 million to class members.
Procedural history
Plaintiffs filed a consumer‑fraud class action alleging false advertising of Gerber Good Start Gentle formula. The court granted class certification in 2019, dismissed the defendants' motions to dismiss and summary judgment, and after years of litigation the parties reached a $19.5 million settlement. The court gave preliminary approval in May 2025 and now issues final approval.