# IN RE PLATINUM AND PALLADIUM ANTITRUST LITIGATION

> District Court, S.D. New York · January 17, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10784327

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, S.D. New York
- **Decided:** January 17, 2025
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10784327

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1/17/2025
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

IN RE PLATINUM AND PALLADIUM Case No. 1:14-cv-9391 (GHW) (VF)
ANTITRUST LITIGATION
JUDGMENT APPROVING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

WHEREAS, plaintiffs Larry Hollin and White Oak Fund LP (“Plaintiffs”) on behalf of
themselves and the other members of the Settlement Class have entered into a settlement as set
forth in the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement with BASF Metals Limited, Goldman Sachs
International, HSBC Banks USA, N.A., and ICBC Standard Bank Plc.
WHEREAS, unless otherwise defined in this Judgment, the capitalized terms herein shall
have the same meaning as they have in the “Settlement Agreement” (ECF No. 325-1), and the
foregoing defendants are collectively referred to as the “Defendants”;
WHEREAS, by Order dated August 24, 2024 (ECF No. 328) (the “Preliminary Approval
Order”), this Court: (i) preliminarily approved the Settlement; (ii) ordered that notice of the
proposed Settlement be provided to the Settlement Class; (iii) provided Settlement Class Members

with the opportunity to object to the proposed Settlement; (v) provided Settlement Class Members
with the opportunity to exclude themselves from the Settlement Class; and (iv) scheduled a hearing
regarding final approval of the Settlement;
WHEREAS, due and adequate notice has been given to the Settlement Class;
WHEREAS, the Court conducted a hearing on January 14, 2025 (the “Settlement
Hearing”) to consider, among other things, (i) whether the terms and conditions of the Settlement
are fair, reasonable, and adequate to the Settlement Class, and should therefore be approved; and
(ii) whether a judgment should be entered dismissing the Action with prejudice as against the
Defendants; and
WHEREAS, the Court having reviewed and considered the Settlement Agreement, all
papers filed and proceedings held herein in connection with the Settlement, all oral and written

comments received regarding the Settlement, and the record in the Action, and good cause
appearing therefore;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED:
1. Jurisdiction – The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Action, and
all matters relating to the Settlement, as well as personal jurisdiction over all of the Parties and
each of the Settlement Class Members.
2. CAFA Notice – The notice provisions of the Class Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C.
§1715, have been satisfied.
3. Incorporation of Settlement Documents – This Judgment incorporates and makes
a part hereof: (i) the Settlement Agreement filed with the Court on August 23, 2024 (ECF No. 325-

1); and (ii) the Notice and the Summary Notice, both of which were filed with the Court on August
23, 2024 (ECF Nos. 326-4 and 326-5).
4. Class Certification for Settlement Purposes – Pursuant to Rule 23(a) and
23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and based on the record before the Court, the
Court certifies, for the purposes of settlement only the following Settlement Class:
All persons or entities who during the period from January 1, 2008 through
November 30, 2014 either (i) sold platinum or palladium futures contracts in
transactions conducted in whole or in part on NYMEX; (ii) sold platinum or palladium
call options in transactions conducted in whole or in part on NYMEX; or (iii) bought
platinum or palladium put options in transactions conducted in whole or in part on
NYMEX.
Excluded from the Class are Defendants and their employees, affiliates, parents,
subsidiaries, and alleged co-conspirators, whether or not named in this Complaint, and
the U.S. government; provided, however, that Investment Vehicles shall not be
excluded from the definition of “Settlement Class.” Also excluded is the Judge
presiding over this action, his or her law clerks, spouse, and any person within the third
degree of relationship living in the Judge’s household and the spouse of such a person.
5. The Court finds that the requirements of Rule 23(a) and 23(b)(3) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure are satisfied for settlement purposes as follows:
a. Pursuant to Rule 23(a)(1), the Court determines that the Settlement Class
Members are so numerous that their joinder before the Court would be impracticable.
b. Pursuant to Rule 23(a)(2), the Court determines that there are one or more
questions of fact or law common to the Settlement Class.
c. Pursuant to Rule 23(a)(3), the Court determines that Plaintiffs’ claims are
typical of the claims of the Settlement Class.
d. Pursuant to Rule 23(a)(4), the Court determines that Plaintiffs will fairly
and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class. Plaintiffs are certified as class
representatives of the Settlement Class.
e. Pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3), the Court determines that common questions of
law and fact predominate over questions affecting only individual Settlement Class Members.
f. Pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3), the Court determines that a class action is
superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this Action.
g. Pursuant to Rule 23(g), Co-Lead Counsel are certified as class counsel for
the Settlement Class.

6. The Court’s certification of the Settlement Class, and certification of Plaintiffs as
class representatives of the Settlement Class, as provided herein is without prejudice to, or waiver
of, the rights of any Defendant to contest any other request by Plaintiffs to certify a class. The
Court’s findings in this Judgment shall have no effect on any ruling on any motion to certify any
class or appoint class representatives in this litigation, and no party may cite or refer to the Court’s
approval of the Settlement Class as binding or persuasive authority with respect to any motion to
certify such class or appoint class representatives.
7. Settlement Notice – The Court finds that the dissemination of the Notice and the

publication of the Summary Notice: (i) were implemented in accordance with the Preliminary
Approval Order; (ii) constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances; (iii)
constituted notice that was reasonably calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise Settlement
Class Members of (a) the effect of the proposed Settlement (including the Releases to be provided
thereunder), (b) Co-Lead Counsel’s application for an award of attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses,
and service awards, (c) their right to object to any aspect of the Settlement, the Distribution Plan,
and/or Co-Lead Counsel’s application for an award of attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses, and
service awards, and (d) their right to appear at the Settlement Hearing; (iv) constituted due,
adequate, and sufficient notice to all persons and entities entitled to receive notice of the proposed
Settlement; and (v) satisfied the requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

and the United States Constitution (including the Due Process Clause).
8. Final Settlement Approval and Dismissal of Claims – Pursuant to, and in
accordance with, Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court hereby fully and
finally approves the Settlement set forth in the Settlement Agreement in all respects (including,
without limitation, the amount of the Settlement, the Releases provided for therein, and the
dismissal with prejudice of the claims asserted against the Defendants in the Action), and finds
that the Settlement is, in all respects, fair, reasonable, and adequate to the Settlement Class after
considering the factors set out in City of Detroit v. Grinnell Corp., 495 F.2d 448 (2d Cir. 1974),
abrogated on other grounds by Goldberger v. Integrated Res., Inc., 209 F.3d 43 (2d Cir. 2000)
and Rule 23(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
9. Except as to any claim of those persons (identified in Exhibit A) who have timely
requested exclusion from the Settlement Class (“Opt-Outs”), all of the claims asserted against the

Defendants in the Action by Plaintiffs and the other Settlement Class Members are hereby
dismissed with prejudice. The Parties shall bear their own costs and expenses, except as otherwise
expressly provided in the Settlement Agreement.
10. The Opt-Out identified in Exhibit A is excluded from the Settlement Class pursuant
to its request is not bound by the Settlement Agreement, or this Final Judgment, and may not make
any claim or receive any benefit from the Settlement Agreement, whether monetary or otherwise.
11. Binding Effect – The terms of the Settlement Agreement and of this Judgment shall
be binding on the Defendants, the other Released Parties, Plaintiffs, and all other Releasing Parties
(regardless of whether or not any individual Settlement Class Member submits a Claim Form or
seeks or obtains a distribution from the Settlement Fund), as well as their respective heirs,

executors, administrators, predecessors, parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, trustees, successors, and
assigns in their capacities as such.
12. Releases – The Releases set forth in section 4 of the Settlement Agreement,
together with the definitions contained in section 2 of the Settlement Agreement relating thereto,
are expressly incorporated herein in all respects. The Releases are effective as of the Effective
Date. Accordingly, this Court orders that:
(a) Without further action by anyone, and subject to ¶ 13 of this Order, upon
the Effective Date of the Settlement, Plaintiffs, the Releasing Parties, and each of the Settlement
Class Members, on behalf of themselves, and their respective heirs, executors, administrators,
predecessors, successors, and assigns in their capacities as such, shall be deemed to have, and by
operation of law and of this Judgment shall have, fully, finally, and forever compromised, settled,
released, resolved, relinquished, waived, and discharged each and every of the Released Claims1
against the Defendants and the other Released Parties, and shall forever be enjoined from

prosecuting any or all of the Released Claims against any of the Released Parties.
(b) Without further action by anyone, and subject to ¶ 13 of this Order, upon
the Effective Date of the Settlement, the Defendants and each of the Released Parties shall be
deemed to have, and by operation of law and of the judgment shall have fully, finally, and forever
compromised, settled, released, resolved, relinquished, waived, and discharged each and every
Defendants’ Claim as against each and every one of the Releasing Parties, and shall forever be
barred and enjoined from prosecuting any or all of the Defendants’ Claims against any of the
Releasing Parties.
(c) The Court declares that this Judgment and the Settlement Agreement,
including the exhibits thereto, shall be binding on, and shall have res judicata and preclusive effect

in, all pending and future lawsuits or other proceedings against the Released Parties encompassed
by the Released Claims that are maintained by or on behalf of any Releasing Parties. Moreover,

1 “Released Claims” means any and all manner of claims, causes of action, crossclaims, and shall
include Unknown Claims, causes of action, crossclaims, counter-claims, charges, liabilities,
demands, judgments, suits, obligations, debts, setoffs, rights of recovery, or liabilities for any
obligations of any kind whatsoever (however denominated), whether foreign or domestic, whether
class or individual, in law or equity or arising under constitution, statute, regulation, ordinance,
contract, or otherwise in nature, for fees, costs, penalties, fines, debts, expenses, attorneys’ fees,
and damages, whenever incurred, and liabilities of any nature whatsoever (including joint and
several), known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, asserted or unasserted, which any Class
Plaintiffs or Settlement Class Members ever had, now have, or hereafter can, shall or may have,
representatively, derivatively, or in any other capacity, against the Released Parties concerning,
relating to, or arising out of (i) the conduct alleged in the Action, conduct that could have been
alleged in the Action, or conduct arising from the same factual predicate of the Action; or (ii) any
Platinum or Palladium Investment Transaction from January 1, 2008 to November 30, 2014.
the Released Parties may file this Judgment, the Settlement Agreement, including the exhibits
thereto, and the Distribution Plan in any action that may be brought against any of them in order
to support a defense or counterclaim based on the principles of res judicata, collateral estoppel,
full faith and credit, release, good faith settlement, judgment bar, or reduction or any other theory

of claim preclusion or issue preclusion or similar defense or counterclaim.
13. Although the foregoing release is not a general release, such release constitutes a
waiver of Section 1542 of the California Civil Code and any similar statutes (to the extent they
apply to the Action). Section 1542 provides as follows:
A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS
THAT THE CREDITOR OR RELEASING PARTY DOES NOT
KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT
THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE AND THAT, IF
KNOWN BY HIM OR HER, WOULD HAVE MATERIALLY
AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR
OR RELEASED PARTY.

14. Notwithstanding ¶ 11(a)-(b) of this Order, nothing in this Judgment shall bar any
action by any of the Parties to enforce or effectuate the terms of the Settlement Agreement or this
Judgment.
15. Contribution and Indemnification – To the fullest extent permitted by law, the
Court hereby bars claims against the Released Parties for contribution or indemnification (however
denominated) for all or a portion of any amounts paid or awarded in the Action by way of
settlement, judgment, or otherwise by any of the following: (i) any other Defendant currently
named in the Action; (ii) any other Defendant formerly named as a party in the Action; and (iii)
any other Defendant subsequently added or joined as a party in the Action.
16. No Admissions – Neither this Judgment, the Settlement Agreement (whether or
not consummated), including the exhibits thereto and the Distribution Plan (or any other plan of
allocation that may be approved by the Court), the negotiations leading to the execution of the
Settlement Agreement, nor any proceedings taken pursuant to or in connection with the Settlement
Agreement and/or approval of the Settlement (including any arguments proffered in connection
therewith):

(a) shall be offered against any of the Released Parties as evidence of, or
construed as, or deemed to be evidence of any presumption, concession, or admission by any of
the Released Parties with respect to the truth of any fact alleged by Plaintiffs or the validity of any
claim that was or could have been asserted, or the deficiency of any defense that has been or could
have been asserted, in this Action or in any other litigation, or of any liability, negligence, fault,
or other wrongdoing of any kind of any of the Released Parties or in any way referred to for any
other reason as against any of the Released Parties, in any civil, criminal, or administrative action
or proceeding, other than such proceedings as may be necessary to effectuate the provisions of the
Settlement Agreement;
(b) shall be offered against any of the Releasing Parties, as evidence of, or

construed as, or deemed to be evidence of any presumption, concession, or admission by any of
the Releasing Parties that any of their claims are without merit, that any of the Released Parties
had meritorious defenses, or that damages recoverable under the Complaint, First Amended
Complaint, Second Amended Complaint, or Third Amended Complaint, and any amendments
thereto would not have exceeded the Settlement Amount or with respect to any liability,
negligence, fault, or wrongdoing of any kind, or in any way referred to for any other reason as
against any of the Releasing Parties in any civil, criminal, or administrative action or proceeding,
other than such proceedings as may be necessary to effectuate the provisions of the Settlement
Agreement; or
(c) shall be construed against any of the Released Parties or any of the
Releasing Parties as an admission, concession, or presumption that the consideration to be given
under the Settlement represents the amount which could be or would have been recovered after
trial; provided, however, that the Parties, the Releasing Parties, and the Released Parties and their

respective counsel may refer to this Judgment and the Settlement Agreement to effectuate the
protections from liability granted hereunder and thereunder or otherwise to enforce the terms of
the Settlement.
17. Rule 11 Findings – The Court finds that, during the course of the Action, Plaintiffs,
the Defendants, and their respective counsel at all times complied with the requirements of Rule
11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as to each other.
18. Retention of Jurisdiction – Without affecting the finality of this Judgment in any
way, this Court retains continuing and exclusive jurisdiction over: (i) the Parties for purposes of
the administration, interpretation, implementation, and enforcement of the Settlement; (ii) the
disposition of the Settlement Fund; (iii) any application for an award of attorneys’ fees, litigation

expenses, and/or service awards by Co-Lead Counsel in the Action that will be paid from the
Settlement Fund; and (iv) the Settlement Class Members for all matters relating to the Action.
19. Separate Order – A separate order shall be entered regarding the application of
Co-Lead Counsel for an award of attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses, and service awards. Such
order shall in no way affect or delay the finality of this Judgment and shall not affect or delay the
Effective Date of the Settlement.
20. Modification of the Settlement Order – Without further approval from the Court,
Plaintiffs and the Defendants are hereby authorized to agree to and adopt such amendments or
modifications of the Settlement Agreement or any exhibits attached thereto to effectuate the
Settlement that: (1) are not materially inconsistent with this Judgment; and (11) do not materially
limit the rights of Settlement Class Members in connection with the Settlement. Without further
order of the Court, Plaintiffs and the Defendants may agree to reasonable extensions of time to
carry out any provisions of the Settlement.
21. Termination of Settlement — If the Settlement is terminated as provided in the
Settlement Agreement or the Effective Date of the Settlement otherwise fails to occur, this
Judgment shall be vacated, rendered null and void and be of no further force and effect, except as
otherwise provided by the Settlement Agreement, and this Judgment shall be without prejudice to
the rights of Plaintiffs, the other Settlement Class Members, and the Defendants, and the Parties
shall revert to their respective positions in the Action as of April 15, 2024, as provided in the
Settlement Agreement.
22. Approval of Distribution Plan — The Court further finds and concludes that the
Distribution Plan is, in all respects, fair and reasonable to the Settlement Class.
23. Entry of Final Judgment — There is no just reason to delay the entry of this
Judgment as a final judgment in this Action. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is expressly
directed to immediately enter this final judgment in this Action.
The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion pending at Dkt. No. 330.
SO ORDERED.
oops
United States District Judge
DATED: January 17, 2025

10

EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
1. EMP srl Tecnologie Elettriche

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10784327. Public record. Not legal advice.