Judge said she will likely approve $49M settlement in antitrust case

OAKLAND -- A federal judge intends to approve a $49 million settlement in the long-running antitrust dispute over an alleged conspiracy to fix the prices of lithium ion batteries in widely used electronics.

Indirect purchasers will recover $49 million, resolving the class action for roughly $113 million.

"I don't know whether it'll be that exact number," U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said.

Samsung SDI Co. Ltd., Tokin Corp., Toshiba Corp. and Panasonic Corp. will collectively pay the $49 million. SDI will contribute the bulk of the payment with $39.5 million.

The settlement will reach 87% of the class members.

Plaintiffs accused executives at major electronics companies of conspiring to set the prices of lithium ion batteries from 2000 to 2011.

Only direct purchasers could claim damages for price fixing under federal antitrust laws while indirect purchasers claimed state antitrust violations. In re: Lithium Ion Batteries Antitrust Litigation, 13-MD2420 (N.D. Cal., filed Feb. 6, 2013).

The defendants included Sanyo Electronic Co. Ltd. and LG Chem Ltd., both of which pleaded guilty to criminal price-fixing charges.

Gonzalez Rogers indicated she will also approve nearly $34 million, or nearly 30% of the total settlement, in attorney fees. Plaintiffs' attorneys originally sought 25% of the $113 million settlement.

Robert Clore, who represents an objector to the settlement, argued the fees were exorbitant.

The judge responded that she has to consider typical rates in antitrust cases, and bringing a case for the indirect purchasers was more difficult than their direct purchaser counterparts.

"These are highly risky endeavors," she said. "It seems to me that [plaintiffs' attorneys] got pretty good results for the indirect purchasers given they would've gotten nothing if they hadn't settled."

Clore said, "It doesn't call for a fee above the 9th Circuit benchmark."

The judge disagreed and remarked that antitrust lawsuits of this nature are vital in holding corporations to "appropriate commercial conduct."

"Without having plaintiffs' attorneys who are willing to file these antitrust lawsuits, we don't keep corporations honest," she said.

Plaintiffs' attorneys alleged the companies entered into the conspiracy in late 2001 after battery prices fell by nearly 50% when new manufacturers entered the market, triggering aggressive price competition.

The defendant companies supposedly controlled 73% to 95% of the worldwide market for lithium ion batteries, which accounted for approximately $9.3 billion, during the class period, according to the complaint.

The antitrust litigation was part of a wave of criminal prosecutions and private class actions against Asian electronics manufacturers at the time.