1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 AFRAA AL EESA, et al., No. 2:23-cv-02183-DC-JDP 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. ORDER DIRECTING THE FILING OF SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING 14 JOHNSON & JOHNSON, et al., (Doc. No. 45) 15 Defendants. 16 17 This matter is before the court on an unopposed motion for approval of minors’ 18 compromise filed by Plaintiffs Afraa Al Eesa, A.A.K. (a minor), and Y.A.K. (a minor). (Doc. No. 19 45.) 20 Local Rule 202(b) provides that “[t]he application [for approval of a proposed settlement] 21 shall disclose . . . such additional information as may be required to enable the Court to determine 22 the fairness of the settlement or compromise.” E.D. Cal. R. 202(b). Courts routinely consider 23 comparable recovery amounts in similar cases to determine the fairness of the settlement or 24 compromise. See Jones v. City of Sacramento, No. 22-cv-00900-DJC-KJN,

, at 25 *5 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 12, 2024) (noting it is plaintiff’s burden to provide “additional information,” 26 including comparable recovery amounts in similar cases, for the court to determine the fairness of 27 a compromise); J.A. v. Cnty. of Shasta, No. 2:23-cv-00675-DC-DMC,

, at *2 28 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2025) (directing plaintiff to file supplemental briefing on a motion for 1 | approval of minor’s settlement to provide the court with authority to support plaintiff's contention 2 | that the settlement was fair and reasonable). In the instant motion, Plaintiffs do not cite to any 3 | decisions in which courts have approved comparable settlements. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are 4 | directed to file supplemental briefing, by no later than June 10, 2025, providing examples of 5 | comparable recovery amounts in similar cases supporting their contention that the proposed 6 | settlement agreement as to each minor Plaintiff is fair and reasonable. 7 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. □ 19 | Dated: _ May 22, 2025 RVI <—_ Dena Coggins 1] United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28