Common use of Pursuant to Fed Clause in Contracts

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conference, by Defense Counsel, on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel on behalf of the Settlement Class, on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight hundred thousand dollars ($1,800,000.00) is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claims. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) a. The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conferenceunder the auspices of an experienced, neutral mediator, by Defense Counsel, Counsel on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and by Class Counsel on behalf of the Class Representatives and the Settlement Class, on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs b. Class Representatives and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Class Action; (c) c. If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) d. The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight hundred thousand Settlement— fifteen million dollars ($1,800,000.00) is 15,000,000.00)—is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Settlement Amount Fund is efficient and requires no filing of claimsclaims for participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees with Active Accounts, and requires only a modest Former Participant Claim Form for Former Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees without Active Accounts. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees and expenses, and case contribution awards to Class Representatives, do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) e. At all times, the Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) f. The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIVCiv. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Classadequate, and more particularly finds that: (a) a. The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conference, length by Defense CounselCounsel for the Defendants, on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs Plaintiff and Class Counsel Action on behalf of the Settlement Class, on the other hand;, through mediation conducted by Doug Hinson. (b) b. Plaintiffs and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the assess settlement value of the Action;. (c) c. The Action settled after this Court dismissed Named Plaintiff’s Complaint in part. d. If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs Plaintiff and the Settlement Class Defendants faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation;. (d) e. The Settlement amount of the Settlement – one million, eight hundred thousand dollars ($1,800,000.00800,000.00) is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. . f. The proposed method of for distributing settlement payments is efficient, relying on records regularly maintained by the Class Settlement Amount is efficient Plans’ recordkeeper, and requires no filing of class members are not required to file claims. . g. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, . h. The parties have no agreements outside the Settlement Agreement and there are no agreements, apart from agreements between the Settlement, required parties subject to be considered under FEDFed. R. CIVCiv. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases;. (e) i. At all times, the Named Plaintiffs Plaintiff and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and. (f) The Court has duly considered j. Defendants retained independent fiduciary Newport Trust Company, LLC to independently determine whether to approve and overruled any filed objection(s) authorize the Settlement on behalf of the Plans. Prior to [37 days prior to the Fairness Hearing], Newport Trust Company issued its determination, approved and authorized the Settlement on the Plans’ behalf, and made no objections to the Settlement to the extent there were anyor any of its terms.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIVCiv. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conference, length by Defendants and Defense Counsel, on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel on behalf of the Settlement Class, on the other handhand with the assistance of a mediator, Xxxxxx X. Xxxxx of JAMS; (b) Plaintiffs and Defendants had possessed sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight hundred thousand five million dollars ($1,800,000.005,000,000.00) is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claims. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FEDFed. R. CIVCiv. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and Defense Counsel and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conferenceunder the auspices of the Mediator, by Defense Counsel, on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel on behalf of the Settlement Class, on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one two million, eight three hundred thousand dollars ($1,800,000.002,300,000.00) is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claims. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and, (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-arm’s length, via a Court- supervised settlement conferenceunder the auspices of the Mediator, by Defense Counsel, on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and by Class Counsel on behalf of the Class Representatives and the Settlement Class, on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Class Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one two million, eight nine hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($1,800,000.002,950,000) is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Gross Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claimsclaims for Current Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees with Active Accounts, and requires only a modest Former Participant Claim Form for Former Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees without Active Accounts. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Gross Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e23(c), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-arm’s length, via a Court- supervised settlement conferenceunder the auspices of an experienced, neutral mediator, by Defense Counsel, Counsel on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and by Class Counsel on behalf of the Class Representatives and the Settlement Class, on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Class Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight Settlement—twelve million five hundred thousand dollars ($1,800,000.00) is 12,500,000.00)—is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Net Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claimsclaims for Current Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees with Active Accounts, and requires only a modest Former Participant Claim Form for Former Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees without Active Accounts. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees and expenses, and Case Contribution Awards to Class Representatives, do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Gross Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conferenceunder the auspices of the Mediator, by Defense Counsel, on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel on behalf of the Settlement Class, on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Class Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one million, million eight hundred thousand dollars ($1,800,000.00) is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Gross Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claims. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Gross Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conference, length by Defense Counsel, on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel on behalf of the Settlement Class, on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight million one hundred thousand dollars ($1,800,000.001,100,000.00) is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claims. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conference, arm’s length by Defense Counsel, Counsel on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and by Class Counsel on behalf of the Class Representatives and the Settlement Class, Class on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – Settlement—one million, eight hundred thousand million dollars ($1,800,000.00) is 1,000,000.00)—is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account considering the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Net Settlement Amount Fund is efficient and requires no filing of claimsclaims for Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees with Active Accounts, and requires only a modest Former Participant Claim Form for Former Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees without Active Accounts. The Settlement terms related to attorneysAttorneys’ fees Fees and expenses and case contribution awards to Class Representatives do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conference, arm’s length by Defense Counsel, Counsel on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and by Class Counsel on behalf of the Class Representatives and the Settlement Class, Class on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Class Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – Settlement—one million, eight million one hundred thousand dollars ($1,800,000.00) 1,100,000.00)2—is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account considering the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Net Settlement Amount Fund is efficient and requires no filing of claimsclaims for Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees with Active Accounts, and requires only a modest Former Participant Claim Form for Former Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees without Active Accounts. The Settlement terms related to attorneysAttorneys’ fees Fees and expenses and case contribution awards to Class Representatives do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; andand 2As part of the Settlement, Defendants have also agreed to pay the first $50,000.00 of Administrative Expenses. (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-arm’s length, via a Court- supervised settlement conferenceunder the auspices of an experienced, neutral mediator, by Defense Counsel, Counsel on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and by Class Counsel on behalf of the Class Representative and the Settlement Class, Class on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs Class Representative and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs Class Representative and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight Settlement—eleven million eight-hundred thousand dollars ($1,800,000.00) is 11,800,000.00)—is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account considering the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Net Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claimsclaims for Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees with Active Accounts, and requires only a modest Former Participant Claim Form for Former Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees without Active Accounts. The Settlement terms related to attorneysAttorneys’ fees Fees and expenses and case contribution awards to Class Representative do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs Class Representative and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-arm’s length, via a Court- supervised settlement conferenceincluding under the auspices of an experienced, neutral mediator, by Defense Counsel, Counsel on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and by Class Counsel on behalf of Class Representatives and the Settlement Class, Class on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight Settlement—three million five hundred thousand dollars ($1,800,000.00) is 3,500,000.00)—is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account considering the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Net Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claimsclaims for Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees with Active Accounts, and requires only a modest Former Participant Claim Form for Former Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees without Active Accounts. The Settlement terms related to attorneysAttorneys’ fees Fees and expenses and case contribution awards to Class Representatives do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases.; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) a. The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conferenceunder the auspices of an experienced, neutral mediator, by Defense Counsel, Counsel on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and by Class Counsel on behalf of the Class Representatives and the Settlement Class, on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs b. Class Representatives and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Class Action; (c) c. If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) d. The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight Settlement— two million four hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($1,800,000.00) is 2,450,000.00)—is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Net Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claimsclaims for Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees with Active Accounts, and requires only a modest Former Participant Claim Form for Former Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees without Active Accounts. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees and expenses, and Case Contribution Awards to Class Representatives, do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Gross Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) e. At all times, the Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) f. The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-arm’s length, via a Court- supervised settlement conferenceunder the auspices of an experienced, neutral mediator, by Defense Counsel, Counsel on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and by Class Counsel on behalf of the Class Representatives and the Settlement Class, Class on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight Settlement—nine million seven hundred fifty thousand dollars ($1,800,000.00) is 9,750,000.00)—and non-monetary relief provided by the Settlement are fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account considering the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Net Settlement Amount Fund is efficient and requires no filing of claimsclaims for Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees with Active Accounts, and requires only a modest Former Participant Claim Form for Former Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees without Active Accounts. The Settlement terms related to attorneysAttorneys’ fees Fees and expenses and case contribution awards to Class Representatives do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conference, length by Defense Counsel, on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel on behalf of the Settlement Class, on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight five hundred thousand dollars ($1,800,000.00500,000.00) is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claims. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conferenceunder the auspices of the Mediator, by Defendant and Defense Counsel, on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel on behalf of the Settlement Class, on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs and Defendants Defendant had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Class Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight hundred thousand five million dollars ($1,800,000.005,000,000.00) is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Gross Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claims. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Gross Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants Defendant and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conferenceunder the auspices of the Mediator, by Defense Counsel, on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel on behalf of the Settlement Class, on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one two million, eight five hundred fifty thousand dollars ($1,800,000.002,550,000.00) is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claims. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conference, length by Defense Counsel, on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Class Counsel on behalf of the Settlement Class, on the other hand, with the participation of neutral mediator Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxx of JAMS including an all-day mediation on July 6, 2023 and subsequent telephone conferences concluding on September 6, 2023; (b) Plaintiffs and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and the Settlement Class faced the risk, uncertainty, expense, risk, and uncertainty delays of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight hundred thousand twenty million dollars ($1,800,000.0020,000,000.00) – is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the risks, costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claimsclaims by Class Members. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-arm’s length, via a Court- supervised settlement conferenceunder the auspices of the Mediator, by Defense Counsel, on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and by Class Counsel on behalf of the Class Representatives and the Settlement Class, on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Class Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars ($1,800,000.001,875,000) is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Gross Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claimsclaims for participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees with Active Accounts, and requires only a modest Former Participant Claim Form for Former Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees without Active Accounts. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Gross Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs Class Representatives and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

Pursuant to Fed. R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: (a) The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, via a Court- supervised settlement conference, length by Defense Counsel, on the one hand, and the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel on behalf of the Settlement Class, on the other hand; (b) Plaintiffs and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Action; (c) If the Settlement had not been achieved, Named Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; (d) The amount of the Settlement – one million, eight six hundred fifty thousand dollars ($1,800,000.00650,000.00) is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Class Net Settlement Amount is efficient and requires no filing of claims. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Class Gross Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; (e) At all times, the Named Plaintiffs and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and (f) The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.