U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2020

Thomas Pekoc v. Wells Fargo & Company

Thomas Pekoc v. Wells Fargo & Company
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided April 20, 2020

Thomas Pekoc v. Wells Fargo & Company

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 20 2020 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GARY HEFLER; et al., No. 19-15140 Plaintiffs-Appellees, D.C. No. 4:16-cv-05479-JST v, MEMORANDUM* THOMAS PEKOC, Objector-Appellant, v. WELLS FARGO & COMPANY; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Jon S. Tigar, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 16, 2020** San Francisco, California

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Before: BERZON and IKUTA, Circuit Judges, and LEMELLE,*** District Judge.

Thomas Pekoc appeals the district court’s rejection of his objection to the award of attorneys’ fees to Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLF (BLB&G). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Pekoc raised only one argument to the district court: that the fee agreement between lead plaintiff Union Asset Management Holding AG and BLB&G was unreasonable because BLB&G had previously settled a class action for an overall fee of 8.5% of the total award, in contrast to the 20% award here. This argument fails. The district court found that BLB&G ultimately received a 20% award in the earlier class action, see In re Merck & Co., Sec., Derivative & “ERISA” Litig., MDL No. 1658, 2016 WL 11575090, at *5–6 (D.N.J. June 28, 2016), which supports the court’s determination that the fee award in this case was reasonable.

Pekoc forfeited the additional arguments he now raises on appeal, see In re Mercury Interactive Corp. Sec. Litig., 618 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir. 2010), and does not explain why we should consider those arguments despite the forfeiture.

Therefore, we decline to do so. AFFIRMED.

*** The Honorable Ivan L.R. Lemelle, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Louisiana, sitting by designation.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.