Common use of Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only Clause in Contracts

Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only. The Settlement Agreement provides for: (i) a Settlement Class consisting of individuals to whom Defendant Order Express, Inc. (“Order Express”) sent notice of the Ransomware Attack that Order Express announced on or around December 15, 2022, defined as follows: Settlement Class: All individual U.S. residents to whom Order Express sent notice of the Ransomware Attack. Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) the Judge and Magistrate Judge presiding over the Lawsuits, any members of the Judges’ respective staffs, and immediate members of the Judges’ 1 All capitalized terms herein have the same definitions as set forth in the Settlement Agreement. respective families; (2) officers, directors, members and shareholders of Order Express; (3) persons who timely and validly request exclusion from and/or opt-out of the Settlement Class and the successors and assigns of any such excluded persons; and (4) any person found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be guilty under criminal law of initiating, causing, aiding or abetting the criminal activity or occurrence of the Ransomware Attack or who pleads nolo contendere to any such charge. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1), the Court finds that giving notice is justified. The Court finds that it will likely be able to approve the proposed Settlement as fair, reasonable, and adequate. The Court also finds that it will likely be able to certify the Settlement Class for purposes of judgment on the settlement because it meets all of the requirements of Rule 23(a) and the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). Specifically, the Court finds for settlement purposes that: a) the Settlement Class is so numerous that joinder of all Settlement Class Members would be impracticable; b) there are issues of law and fact that are common to the Settlement Class; c) the claims of the Representative Plaintiff are typical of and arise from the same operative facts and seek similar relief as the claims of the Settlement Class Members; d) the Representative Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class as the Representative Plaintiff has no interests antagonistic to or in conflict with the Settlement Class and has retained experienced and competent counsel to prosecute this matter on behalf of the Settlement Class; e) questions of law or fact common to Settlement Class Members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members; and f) a class action and class settlement is superior to other methods available for a fair and efficient resolution of this controversy.

Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only. For purposes of the Settlement and pursuant to this Final Approval Order and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) and (e), the Court certifies a class in this matter defined as follows: All residents of the United States who made a credit or debit card purchase at any Affected Restaurant during the period of the Data Breach Incident. The Settlement Agreement provides forClass specifically excludes: (i) a Checkers and its officers and directors; (ii) all Settlement Class consisting of individuals to whom Defendant Order Express, Inc. (“Order Express”) sent notice of the Ransomware Attack that Order Express announced on or around December 15, 2022, defined as follows: Settlement Class: All individual U.S. residents to whom Order Express sent notice of the Ransomware Attack. Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) the Judge and Magistrate Judge presiding over the Lawsuits, any members of the Judges’ respective staffs, and immediate members of the Judges’ 1 All capitalized terms herein have the same definitions as set forth in the Settlement Agreement. respective families; (2) officers, directors, members and shareholders of Order Express; (3) persons Members who timely and validly request exclusion from and/or opt-out of the Settlement Class and Class; (iii) the successors and assigns Judge or Magistrate Judge to whom the action is assigned and, any member of any such excluded personsthose Judges’ staffs or immediate family members; and (4iv) any other person found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be guilty under criminal law of initiating, causing, aiding or abetting the criminal activity or occurrence of the Ransomware Attack Data Breach Incident or who pleads nolo contendere to any such charge. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1), the Court finds that giving notice is justified. The Court finds that it will likely be able to approve the proposed Settlement as fairfinds, reasonable, and adequate. The Court also finds that it will likely be able to certify the Settlement Class for purposes of judgment on the settlement because it meets all of the requirements of Rule 23(a) and the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). Specifically, the Court finds for settlement purposes only, that: (a) the Settlement Class is so numerous that joinder of all Settlement Class Members would be impracticable; (b) there are issues of law and fact that are common to the Settlement Class; (c) the claims of the Representative Plaintiff Plaintiffs are typical of and arise from the same operative facts and seek similar relief as the claims of the Settlement Class Members; (d) the Representative Plaintiff Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Counsel will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class as the Representative Plaintiff has Plaintiffs have no interests antagonistic to or in conflict with the Settlement Class and has have retained experienced and competent counsel to prosecute this matter on behalf of the Settlement Class; (e) questions of law or fact common to Settlement Class Members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members; and (f) a class action and class settlement is superior to other methods available for a fair and efficient resolution of this controversy.

Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only. For settlement purposes only and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) and (e), the Court provisionally certifies a class in this matter defined as follows: All residents of the United States who made a credit or debit card purchase at any Affected Restaurant during the period of the Data Breach Incident. The Settlement Agreement provides forClass specifically excludes: (i) a Checkers and its officers and directors; (ii) all Settlement Class consisting of individuals to whom Defendant Order Express, Inc. (“Order Express”) sent notice of the Ransomware Attack that Order Express announced on or around December 15, 2022, defined as follows: Settlement Class: All individual U.S. residents to whom Order Express sent notice of the Ransomware Attack. Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) the Judge and Magistrate Judge presiding over the Lawsuits, any members of the Judges’ respective staffs, and immediate members of the Judges’ 1 All capitalized terms herein have the same definitions as set forth in the Settlement Agreement. respective families; (2) officers, directors, members and shareholders of Order Express; (3) persons Members who timely and validly request exclusion from and/or opt-out of the Settlement Class and Class; (iii) the successors and assigns Judge or Magistrate Judge to whom the action is assigned and, any member of any such excluded personsthose Judges’ staffs or immediate family members; and (4iv) any other person found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be guilty under criminal law of initiating, causing, aiding or abetting the criminal activity or occurrence of the Ransomware Attack Data Breach Incident or who pleads nolo contendere to any such charge. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1), the Court finds that giving notice is justified. The Court finds that it will likely be able to approve the proposed Settlement as fairprovisionally finds, reasonable, and adequate. The Court also finds that it will likely be able to certify the Settlement Class for purposes of judgment on the settlement because it meets all of the requirements of Rule 23(a) and the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). Specifically, the Court finds for settlement purposes only, that: (a) the Settlement Class is so numerous that joinder of all Settlement Class Members would be impracticable; (b) there are issues of law and fact that are common to the Settlement Class; (c) the claims of the Representative Plaintiff Plaintiffs are typical of and arise from the same operative facts and seek similar relief as the claims of the Settlement Class Members; (d) the Representative Plaintiff Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Counsel will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class as the Representative Plaintiff has Plaintiffs have no interests antagonistic to or in conflict with the Settlement Class and has have retained experienced and competent counsel to prosecute this matter on behalf of the Settlement Class; (e) questions of law or fact common to Settlement Class Members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members; and (f) a class action and class settlement is superior to other methods available for a fair and efficient resolution of this controversy.

Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only. The Settlement Agreement provides for: For settlement purposes only and pursuant to FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 23(a), (i) b)(2), (b)(3), and (e), the Court provisionally certifies a Settlement Class consisting of individuals to whom Defendant Order Express, Inc. (“Order Express”) sent notice of the Ransomware Attack that Order Express announced on or around December 15, 2022, class in this matter defined as follows: Settlement Class: All individual U.S. residents to whom Order Express sent notice of persons residing in the Ransomware AttackUnited States or its territories whose personally identifiable information was identified as potentially being impacted in the November 2020 data security incident announced by Automation Personnel Services, Inc. in March 2021. Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) the Judge and Magistrate Judge is any judges presiding over the Lawsuitsthis Litigation, their immediate family members, and any members of the Judgesjudges’ respective staffsjudicial staff, the officers and directors of Defendant and their immediate members of the Judges’ family members, Class 1 All Unless otherwise indicated, capitalized terms used herein have the same definitions meaning as set forth defined in the Settlement Agreement, which was filed with Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement and Certification of Settlement Class. respective families; (2) officersCounsel and their immediate family members, directors, members and shareholders of Order Express; (3) persons who timely and validly request exclusion from and/or opt-out of the Settlement Class Class, and the successors and assigns legal representatives of any such each of these excluded categories of persons; and (4) any person found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be guilty under criminal law of initiating, causing, aiding or abetting the criminal activity or occurrence of the Ransomware Attack or who pleads nolo contendere to any such charge. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1), the Court finds that giving notice is justified. The Court finds that it will likely be able to approve the proposed Settlement as fairprovisionally finds, reasonable, and adequate. The Court also finds that it will likely be able to certify the Settlement Class for purposes of judgment on the settlement because it meets all of the requirements of Rule 23(a) and the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). Specifically, the Court finds for settlement purposes only, that: (a) the Settlement Class is so numerous that joinder of all Settlement Class Members would be impracticable; (b) there are issues of law and fact that are common to the Settlement Class; (c) the claims of the Settlement Class Representative Plaintiff are typical of and arise from the same operative facts and seek similar relief as the claims of the Settlement Class Members; (d) the Settlement Class Representative Plaintiff and Settlement Class Counsel will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class as the Settlement Class Representative Plaintiff has no interests interest in antagonistic to or in conflict with the Settlement Class and has have retained experienced and competent counsel to prosecute this matter on behalf of the Settlement Class; (e) questions of law or fact common to Settlement Class Members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members; and (f) a class action and class settlement is superior to the other methods available for a fair and efficient resolution of this controversycase; and (g) final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief is appropriate respecting the class as a whole.

Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only. The Settlement Agreement provides for: (i) for a Settlement Class consisting of individuals to whom Defendant Order Express, Inc. (“Order Express”) sent notice of the Ransomware Attack that Order Express announced on or around December 15, 2022, defined as follows: Settlement Class: All individual U.S. residents to whom Order Express of the United States who were sent notice that their personal information may have been accessed, stolen, or compromised as a result of the Ransomware Attack. Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) the Judge and Magistrate Judge presiding over the Lawsuits, any members of the Judges’ respective staffs, and immediate members of the Judges’ 1 All capitalized terms herein have the same definitions as set forth in the Settlement Agreement. respective families; (2) officers, directors, members and shareholders of Order Express; (3) persons who timely and validly request exclusion from and/or opt-out of the Settlement Class and the successors and assigns of any such excluded persons; and (4) any person found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be guilty under criminal law of initiating, causing, aiding or abetting the criminal activity or occurrence of the Ransomware Attack or who pleads nolo contendere to any such chargeData Incident. Pursuant to Federal Rules Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1), the Court finds that giving notice is justified. The Court finds that it will likely be able to approve the proposed Settlement as fair, reasonable, and adequate. The Court also finds that it will likely be able to certify the Settlement Class for purposes of judgment on the settlement Settlement because it meets all of the requirements of Rule 1 All defined terms herein have the same meaning as set forth in the Settlement Agreement. 23(a) and the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). Specifically, the Court finds for settlement purposes that: a) the Settlement Class is so numerous that joinder of all Settlement Class Members would be impracticable; b) there are issues of law and fact that are common to the Settlement Class; c) the claims of the Representative Plaintiff Plaintiffs are typical of and arise from the same operative facts and the Representative Plaintiffs seek similar relief as the claims of the Settlement Class Members; d) the Representative Plaintiff Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class as the Representative Plaintiff has Plaintiffs have no interests interest antagonistic to or in conflict with the Settlement Class and has have retained experienced and competent counsel to prosecute this matter Litigation on behalf of the Settlement Class; e) questions of law or fact common to Settlement Class Members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members; and f) a class action and class settlement is superior to other methods available for a fair and efficient resolution of this controversyLitigation.

Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only. The Settlement Agreement provides for: (i) For settlement purposes only and pursuant to Rule 42 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court provisionally certifies a Settlement Class consisting of individuals to whom Defendant Order Express, Inc. (“Order Express”) sent notice of the Ransomware Attack that Order Express announced on or around December 15, 2022, in this matter defined as follows: Settlement Class: All individual U.S. residents to whom Order Express all persons Southland identified as being among those individuals impacted by the Data Breach, including all who were sent a notice of the Ransomware AttackData Breach on or about April 8, 2022. The Settlement Class includes approximately 11,499 people. Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) the Judge and Magistrate Judge are any judge presiding over the Lawsuits, this matter and any members of the Judges’ respective staffstheir first-degree relatives, and immediate members of the Judges’ 1 All capitalized terms herein have the same definitions as set forth in the Settlement Agreement. respective families; (2) judicial staff, Southland’s officers, directors, members and shareholders of Order Express; (3) members, and persons who timely and validly request exclusion from and/or opt-out of the Settlement Class and the successors and assigns of any such excluded persons; and (4) any person found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be guilty under criminal law of initiating, causing, aiding or abetting the criminal activity or occurrence of the Ransomware Attack or who pleads nolo contendere to any such chargeClass. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1), Tex. R. Civ. P. 42(a) the Court finds that giving notice is justified. The Court finds that it will likely be able to approve the proposed Settlement as fairprovisionally finds, reasonable, and adequate. The Court also finds that it will likely be able to certify the Settlement Class for purposes of judgment on the settlement because it meets all of the requirements of Rule 23(a) and the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). Specifically, the Court finds for settlement purposes only, that: a(1) the Settlement Class is so numerous that joinder of all Settlement Class Members would be impracticable; b(2) there are issues questions of law and or fact that are common to the Settlement ClassClass 1 Unless otherwise indicated, capitalized terms used herein have the same meaning as in the Settlement Agreement. which predominate over any questions affecting only individual class members; c(3) the claims of the Representative Plaintiff are typical of and arise from the same operative facts and seek similar relief as the claims of the Settlement Class Members; dand (4) the Representative Plaintiff and Settlement Class Counsel will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class as the Representative Plaintiff has no interests interest antagonistic to or in conflict with the Settlement Class and has have retained experienced and competent counsel to prosecute this matter on behalf of the Settlement Class; e) . Pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 42(b)(3), the Court finds that questions of law or fact common to Settlement Class Members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members; members and f) a class action and class settlement is superior to other methods available for a fair and efficient resolution of this controversy.

Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only. The Settlement Agreement provides for: (i) for a Settlement Class consisting of individuals to whom Defendant Order Express, Inc. (“Order Express”) sent notice of the Ransomware Attack that Order Express announced on or around December 15, 2022, defined as follows: Settlement Class: All individual U.S. residents persons who purchased Weighted Goods from Walmart in the United States from February 13, 2015, to whom Order Express sent notice the date of this Order, whose Weighted Goods’ unit sale price was not accurately reflected in the Ransomware Attackfinal sale price. Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) the Judge and Magistrate Judge judges presiding over the Lawsuitsthis Litigation, any and members of their direct families; (2) the Judges’ respective staffsDefendant, its subsidiaries, parent companies, successors, predecessors, and immediate members of any entity in which the Judges’ Defendant or its parents 1 All capitalized defined terms herein have the same definitions meaning as set forth in the Settlement Agreement. respective families; (2) have a controlling interest and their current or former officers, directors, members and shareholders of Order Expressemployees; (3) persons who timely and validly request exclusion from and/or opt-out of the Settlement Class and Members who submit a valid Opt-Out Request for exclusion prior to the successors and assigns of any such excluded persons; and (4) any person found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be guilty under criminal law of initiating, causing, aiding or abetting the criminal activity or occurrence of the Ransomware Attack or who pleads nolo contendere to any such chargeOpt-Out Deadline. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1), the Court finds that giving notice is justified. The Court finds that it will likely be able to approve the proposed Settlement as fair, reasonable, and adequate. The Court also finds that it will likely be able to certify the Settlement Class for purposes of judgment on the settlement Settlement because it meets all of the requirements of Rule 23(a) and the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). Specifically, the Court finds for settlement purposes that: a) the Settlement Class is so numerous that joinder of all Settlement Class Members would be impracticable; b) there are issues of law and fact that are common to the Settlement Class; c) the claims of the Settlement Class Representative Plaintiff are typical of and arise from the same operative facts and seek the Settlement Class Representative seeks similar relief as the claims of the Settlement Class Members; d) the Settlement Class Representative Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class as the Settlement Class Representative Plaintiff has no interests interest antagonistic to or in conflict with the Settlement Class and has retained experienced and competent counsel to prosecute this matter Litigation on behalf of the Settlement Class; e) questions of law or fact common to Settlement Class Members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members; and f) a class action and class settlement is superior to other methods available for a fair and efficient resolution of this controversyLitigation.

Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only. The Settlement Agreement provides forFor settlement purposes only and pursuant to Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.220(a), the Court provisionally certifies a class in this matter defined as follows: All U.S. persons who are, or have been, patients of Defendant who were treated at Defendant’s U.S. clinics and who visited any websites, patient portals, and/or mobile applications owned, operated, or managed directly or indirectly by Defendant or its subsidiaries or affiliates at least once between November 20, 2017 and up to and including September 21, 2023. Excluded from the Class are: (i) Defendant, any entity in which Defendant has a Settlement Class consisting of individuals to whom Defendant Order Expresscontrolling interest, Inc. and Defendant’s affiliates, parents, subsidiaries, officers, directors, legal representatives, successors, and assigns; (“Order Express”ii) sent notice of the Ransomware Attack that Order Express announced on any judge, justice, or around December 15, 2022, defined as follows: Settlement Class: All individual U.S. residents to whom Order Express sent notice of the Ransomware Attack. Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) the Judge and Magistrate Judge judicial officer presiding over the Lawsuits, any Litigation and the members of their immediate families and judicial staff; and (iii) any individual who timely and validly excludes themselves from the Judges’ respective staffsSettlement. 1 Unless otherwise indicated, and immediate members of the Judges’ 1 All capitalized terms used herein have the same definitions meaning as set forth defined in the Settlement Agreement. respective families; (2) officersAgreement and Release, directors, members and shareholders which was filed with Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Order Express; (3) persons who timely and validly request exclusion from and/or opt-out of the Settlement Class and the successors and assigns of any such excluded persons; and (4) any person found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be guilty under criminal law of initiating, causing, aiding or abetting the criminal activity or occurrence of the Ransomware Attack or who pleads nolo contendere to any such charge. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1), the Court finds that giving notice is justifiedAction Settlement. The Court finds that it will likely be able to approve the proposed Settlement as fairprovisionally finds, reasonable, and adequate. The Court also finds that it will likely be able to certify the Settlement Class for purposes of judgment on the settlement because it meets all of the requirements of Rule 23(a) and the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). Specifically, the Court finds for settlement purposes only, that: (a) the Settlement Class is so numerous that joinder of all Settlement Class Members would be impracticable; (b) there are issues of law and fact that are common to the Settlement Class; (c) the claims of the Representative Plaintiff Settlement Class Representatives are typical of and arise from the same operative facts and seek similar relief as the claims of the Settlement Class Members; (d) the Representative Plaintiff Settlement Class Representatives and Settlement Class Counsel will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class as the Representative Plaintiff has Settlement Class Representatives have no interests interest antagonistic to or in conflict with the Settlement Class and has have retained experienced and competent counsel to prosecute this matter on behalf of the Settlement Class; (e) questions of law or fact common to Settlement Class Members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members; and (f) a class action and class settlement is superior to other methods available for a fair and efficient resolution of this controversycase.

Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only. The Settlement Agreement provides for: (i) for a Settlement Class consisting of individuals to whom Defendant Order Express, Inc. (“Order Express”) sent notice of the Ransomware Attack that Order Express announced on or around December 15, 2022, defined as follows: Settlement Class: All individual U.S. residents to whom Order Express sent notice persons residing in the United States who participated in funds or trusts managed by WPAS, whose Private Information was potentially compromised as a result of the Ransomware AttackData Security Incident that WPAS discovered on approximately July 21, 2021. Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) the Judge and Magistrate Judge presiding over the Lawsuits, any members of the Judges’ respective staffs, and immediate members of the Judges’ 1 All capitalized defined terms herein in this Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement (“Preliminary Approval Order”) have the same definitions meaning as set forth in the Settlement Agreement, unless otherwise indicated. respective familiesDocuSign Envelope ID: EC01DBF8-B3E8-430E-B0BE-C81D735AA71D Excluded from the Settlement Class are (i) WPAS; (2ii) officers, directors, members and shareholders of Order Expressthe Related Entities; (3iii) persons all Settlement Class Members who timely and validly request exclusion from and/or opt-out of the Settlement Class Class; (iv) any judges assigned to this case and the successors their staff and assigns of any such excluded personsfamily; and (4v) any person other Person found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be guilty under criminal law of initiating, causing, aiding aiding, or abetting the criminal activity or occurrence of that resulted in the Ransomware Attack Data Security Incident or who pleads nolo contendere to any such charge. Pursuant to Federal Rules Washington Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(123(e), the Court finds that giving notice is justified. The Court finds that it will likely be able to approve the proposed Settlement as fair, reasonable, and adequate. The Court also finds that it will likely be able to certify the Settlement Class for purposes of judgment on the settlement Settlement because it meets all of the requirements of Rule 23(a) and the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). Specifically, the Court finds for settlement purposes only that: (a) the Settlement Class is are so numerous that joinder of all Settlement Class Members would be impracticable; (b) there are issues of law and fact that are common to the Settlement Class; (c) the claims of the Representative Plaintiff Settlement Class Representatives are typical of typical, and arise from the same operative facts and seek similar relief as the claims of (d) the Settlement Class Members; d) the Representative Plaintiff Representatives will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class as the Representative Plaintiff has no interests antagonistic to or in conflict with the Settlement Class and has retained experienced and competent counsel to prosecute this matter on behalf of the Settlement Class; e) questions of law or fact common to Settlement Class Members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members; and f) a class action and class settlement is superior to other methods available for a fair and efficient resolution of this controversy.

Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only. For settlement purposes only and pursuant to Georgia Code Section 9-11-23, the Court provisionally certifies a Settlement Class in this matter defined as follows: All persons whose Personal Information was compromised as a result of the Data Breach and/or were notified by or on behalf of Gas South and/or were intended to be notified by or on behalf of Gas South that their Personal Information was compromised as a result of the Data Breach. The Settlement Agreement provides forClass includes approximately 38,674 people. The Settlement Class specifically excludes: (i) a Gas South and its officers and directors; (ii) all Settlement Class consisting of individuals to whom Defendant Order Express, Inc. (“Order Express”) sent notice of the Ransomware Attack that Order Express announced on or around December 15, 2022, defined as follows: Settlement Class: All individual U.S. residents to whom Order Express sent notice of the Ransomware Attack. Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) the Judge and Magistrate Judge presiding over the Lawsuits, any members of the Judges’ respective staffs, and immediate members of the Judges’ 1 All capitalized terms herein have the same definitions as set forth in the Settlement Agreement. respective families; (2) officers, directors, members and shareholders of Order Express; (3) persons Members who timely and validly request exclusion from and/or opt-out of the Settlement Class and Class; (iii) the successors and assigns Judge assigned to evaluate the fairness of any such excluded personsthis settlement; and (4iv) any person other Person found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be guilty under criminal law of initiating, causing, aiding or abetting the criminal activity or occurrence of pertaining to the Ransomware Attack Data Breach or who pleads nolo contendere to any such charge. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1Georgia Code Section 9-11-23(a), the Court finds that giving notice is justified. The Court finds that it will likely be able to approve the proposed Settlement as fairprovisionally finds, reasonable, and adequate. The Court also finds that it will likely be able to certify the Settlement Class for purposes of judgment on the settlement because it meets all of the requirements of Rule 23(a) and the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). Specifically, the Court finds for settlement purposes only, that: a(1) the Settlement Class is so numerous that joinder of all Settlement Class Members would be impracticable; b(2) there are issues of law and fact that are common to the Settlement Class; c(3) the claims of the Representative Plaintiff Plaintiffs are typical of and arise from the same operative facts and seek similar relief as the claims of the Settlement Class Members; dand (4) the Representative Plaintiff Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Counsel will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class as the Representative Plaintiff has Plaintiffs have no interests interest antagonistic to or 1 Unless otherwise indicated, capitalized terms used herein have the same meaning as in the Settlement Agreement. in conflict with the Settlement Class and has have retained experienced and competent counsel to prosecute this matter on behalf of the Settlement Class. Pursuant to Georgia Code Section 9-11- 23(b), the Court finds that (1) the prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the Settlement Class would create a risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual members of the Settlement Class and would establish incompatible standards of conduct for Defendant; eand (2) questions of law or fact common to Settlement Class Members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members; members and f) a class action and class settlement is superior to other methods available for a fair and efficient resolution of this controversy.