Important Court Documents
| Date Filed/ Sent | Docket Number | Docket Text |
| 12/13/2024 | 52 | Consolidated Class Action Complaint |
| 12/30/2025 | 131 | Memorandum Opinion and Order Certifying Class |
| 1/16/2026 |
137 |
Order to Submit Revised Documents |
| 01/23/2026 | TEXT ORDER issued by Chief/Senior District Judge CATHERINE C. EAGLES on 1/23/2026. The Court is reviewing the parties joint submission on class notice. Doc. 134. Once again counsel have not complied with the court order to meet and confer. Most obviously, for example, they have not agreed on the petty matter of capitalization. More substantively, the defendants proposal includes a toll free number while the plaintiffs does not, and yet the parties do not address the apparent disagreement, giving rise to the inference that they did not discuss it. Conferring does not require unwarranted concessions, but when done in good faith, as required, it results in clarification and narrowing of disputes, simplifies court filings, and allows everyone to focus on what really matters. This results in better use of court time, less expense to litigants, and other benefits. To reduce unnecessary drain on court resources and to insure compliance, the parties can expect court micromanagement going forward, such as being ordered to meet and confer in person in a particular location. Counsel and the parties are WARNED that in addition to such micromanaging, sanctions are a possibility if one or both continue to give inadequate attention to meet and confer orders. See, e.g., Krakauer v. Dish Network, LLC, 2018 WL 4356752 (M.D.N.C., 2018). No later than close of business today, each side SHALL immediately provide the case manager with Word versions of their proposed long form and postcard notices.(rw) (Entered: 01/23/2026) | |
| 2/6/2026 | 146 | Order Denying Motion to Seal Doc 135 |
| 2/9/2026 | 147 | Memorandum Opinion and Order Approving Notice |
| 2/11/2026 | TEXT ORDER issued by Chief/Senior District Judge CATHERINE C. EAGLES on 2/11/2026. The parties have further conferred regarding the exhibit of the plaintiffs' rating decision letters, Doc. 73-5 (placeholder), Doc. 75-5 (sealed unredacted version). The parties now agree to a redacted public version that does not necessitate a motion to seal. This narrowing provides more access for the public and conserves judicial resources. The clerk is directed to substitute Doc. 73-5 with the provided public version. The Court has not and will not consider the full version at Doc. 75-5. (km) (Entered: 02/11/2026) | |
| 3/6/2026 | 153 | Order Denying Amended Motion to Seal |
| 3/9/2026 | 154 | Order Motion to Seal Doc 107 |
| 3/10/2026 | Long Form Notice |