Transcription
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 1 of 74IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINAGREENWOOD DIVISIONIn re:Building Materials Corporation of AmericaAsphalt Roofing Shingle Products LiabilityLitigation)))))This Agreement relates to:))SUSAN D. ASHLEY, on behalf of herself and )all others similarly situated,))Plaintiff,)v.))GAF MATERIALS CORPORATION,))Defendant.)))THOMAS BYRD, on behalf of himself and all )others similarly situated,))Plaintiff,)v.))GAF MATERIALS CORPORATION,))Defendant.)))KATHLEEN ERICKSON, on behalf of herself )and all others similarly situated,))Plaintiff,)v.))GAF MATERIALS CORPORATION,))Defendant.))MDL No.: 8:11-mn-02000-JMCCivil Action No. 8:13-03424-JMCCivil Action No. 8:12-00789-JMCCivil Action No. 8:11-03085-JMC
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14)TINA GRIFFIN, on behalf of herself and all)others similarly situated,))Plaintiff,)v.))GAF MATERIALS CORPORATION,))Defendant.)))DIANE HANER, on behalf of herself and all)others similarly situated,))Plaintiff,)v.))GAF MATERIALS CORPORATION,))Defendant.)))SYBIL MCDANIEL, on behalf of herself and all )others similarly situated,))Plaintiff,)v.))GAF MATERIALS CORPORATION,))Defendant.)))JAMES MOROCCO, on behalf of himself and )all others similarly situated,))Plaintiff,)v.))GAF MATERIALS CORPORATION,))Defendant.))Entry Number 117-2Page 2 of 74Civil Action No. 8:12-00082-JMCCivil Action No. 8:11-02926-JMCCivil Action No. 8:11-02879-JMCCivil Action No. 8:11-02785-JMC
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 3 of 74)ANGELA POSEY, on behalf of herself and all ))others similarly situated,))Plaintiff,v.) Civil Action No. 3:11-02784-JMCGAF MATERIALS CORPORATION,))))Defendant.)MICHAEL RAGAN, on behalf of himself andall others similarly situated,Plaintiff,v.)))))) Civil Action No. 8:12-00095-JMCGAF MATERIALS ENTDecembe 2014
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 4 of 74TABLE OF CONTENTSPage1.RECITALS .12.DEFINITIONS.83.EFFECTIVE DATE .164.CLASS CERTIFICATION .165.CLAIMS TO BE COMPENSATED BY THE SETTLEMENT .176.RELEASE .217.CLAIMS PROGRAM PROCEDURES.248.SPECIAL MASTER .379.AMOUNTS PAYABLE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS .3810.ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND INCENTIVE PAYMENTS TO THE CLASSREPRESENTATIVES .4111.THE PRELIMINARY APPROVAL ORDER .4212.NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT.4313.SETTLEMENT CLASS MEMBERS’ RIGHT OF EXCLUSION AND TO OBJECT .4514.FINAL JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL .4815.EXCLUSIVE REMEDY; DISMISSAL OF ACTION; JURISDICTION OF COURT .4916.OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS .50
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 5 of 74AMENDEDSETTLEMENTAGREEMENTIT IS HEREBY AGREED, as of December 2, 2014, by, between and among SusanD. Ashley, Thomas Byrd, Kathleen Erickson, Tina Griffin, Diane Haner, Sybil McDaniel, JamesMorocco, Angela Posey and Michael Ragan, named plaintiffs in the nine above-captioned actions(hereinafter "Plaintiffs"), in their individual and representative capacities on behalf of themselvesand a putative Settlement Class (as defined herein), and defendant Building Materials Corporationof America d/b/a GAF Materials Corporation (hereinafter "GAF") (collectively, the "Parties"), byand through their duly authorized counsel, that, in consideration of the promises and covenants setforth in this Amended Settlement Agreement (hereinafter "Agreement") and upon entry by theUnited States District Court for the District of South Carolina (the "Court" or "this Court") of aFinal Order and Judgment (as defined herein) approving this Agreement and all of its terms, theclaims asserted against GAF in these actions shall be settled, dismissed, released and compromisedupon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. 11.RECITALS1.1WHEREAS, a putative class action brought by plaintiff Susan D. Ashley onbehalf of owners of structures located within Texas or, alternatively, within certain of the UnitedStates, on which Timberline shingles manufactured at GAF's manufacturing facility in Dallas,Texas have been installed, was filed in 2013 in the United States District Court for the SouthernDistrict of Texas, and transferred to the United States District Court for the District of SouthCarolina ("District of South Carolina"), under the caption Susan D. Ashley, on behalf of herselfand all others similarly situated v. GAF Materials Corporation, No. 13-cv-03424 (D.S.C.); and1This Agreement amends the Settlement Agreement, dated September 23, 2014 (ECF No. 106-1(CIA No. 11-mn-02000-JMC)).
8:11-mn-02000-JMC1.2Date Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 6 of 74WHEREAS, a putative class action brought by plaintiff Thomas Byrd onbehalf of owners of structures located within Georgia or, alternatively, within certain of the UnitedStates, on which Timberline shingles manufactured at GAF’s manufacturing facility in Tampa,Florida have been installed, was filed in 2012 in the United States District Court for the SouthernDistrict of Georgia, and transferred to the District of South Carolina, under the caption ThomasByrd, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. GAF Materials Corporation, No.12-cv-00789 (D.S.C.); and1.3WHEREAS, a putative class action brought by plaintiff Kathleen Ericksonon behalf of owners of structures located within North Carolina or, alternatively, within certain ofthe United States, on which Timberline shingles manufactured at GAF’s manufacturing facilityin Goldsboro, North Carolina have been installed, was filed in 2011 in the United States DistrictCourt for the District of New Jersey, and transferred to the District of South Carolina, under thecaption Kathleen Erickson, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. GAF MaterialsCorporation, No. 11-cv-03085 (D.S.C.); and1.4WHEREAS, a putative class action brought by plaintiff Tina Griffin onbehalf of owners of structures located within Massachusetts or, alternatively, within certain of theUnited States, on which Timberline shingles manufactured at GAF’s manufacturing facility inMillis, Massachusetts have been installed, was filed in 2011 in the United States District Court forthe District of Massachusetts, and transferred to the District of South Carolina, under the captionTina Griffin, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. GAF Materials Corporation,No. 12-cv-00082 (D.S.C.); and1.5WHEREAS, a putative class action brought by plaintiff Diane Haner onbehalf of owners of structures located within Minnesota or, alternatively, within certain of the2
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 7 of 74United States, on which Timberline shingles manufactured at GAF’s manufacturing facility inMinneapolis, Minnesota have been installed, was filed in 2011 in the United States District Courtfor the District of Minnesota, and transferred to the District of South Carolina, under the captionDiane Haner, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. GAF Materials Corporation,No. 11-cv-02926 (D.S.C.); and1.6WHEREAS, a putative class action brought by plaintiff Sybil McDaniel onbehalf of owners of structures located within Virginia or, alternatively, within certain of the UnitedStates, on which Timberline shingles manufactured at GAF’s manufacturing facility in Baltimore,Maryland have been installed, was filed in 2011 in the United States District Court for the EasternDistrict of Virginia, and transferred to the District of South Carolina, under the caption SybilMcDaniel, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. GAF Materials Corporation, No.11-cv-02879 (D.S.C.); and1.7WHEREAS, a putative class action brought by plaintiff James Morocco onbehalf of owners of structures located within Florida or, alternatively, within certain of the UnitedStates, on which Timberline shingles manufactured at GAF’s manufacturing facility in Tampa,Florida have been installed, was filed in 2011 in the United States District Court for the District ofNew Jersey, and transferred to the District of South Carolina, under the caption James Morocco,on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. GAF Materials Corporation, No.11-cv-02785 (D.S.C.); and1.8WHEREAS, a putative class action brought by plaintiff Angela Posey onbehalf of owners of structures located within South Carolina or, alternatively, within certain of theUnited States, on which Timberline shingles manufactured at GAF’s manufacturing facilities inGoldsboro, North Carolina or Mobile, Alabama have been installed, was filed in 2011 in the3
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 8 of 74United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, and transferred to the District of SouthCarolina under the caption Angela Posey, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v.GAF Materials Corporation, No. 11-cv-02784 (D.S.C.); and1.9WHEREAS, a putative class action brought by plaintiff Michael Ragan onbehalf of owners of structures located within Pennsylvania or, alternatively, within certain of theUnited States, on which Timberline shingles manufactured at GAF’s manufacturing facility inBaltimore, Maryland have been installed, was filed in 2011 in the United States District Court forthe Western District of Pennsylvania, and transferred to the District of South Carolina, under thecaption Michael Ragan, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. GAF MaterialsCorporation, No. 12-cv-00095 (D.S.C.); and1.10WHEREAS, in 2011, 2012 and 2013, the United States Judicial Panel onMultidistrict Litigation transferred to this Court the nine above-mentioned actions, as well ascertain additional actions (“Other Actions”) involving allegations pertaining to Timberline roofing shingles manufactured by GAF (including in every case allegations that Timberline shingles were or are prone to premature cracking, splitting or tearing), for coordinated orconsolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 under the caption In re BuildingMaterials Corporation of America Asphalt Roofing Shingle Products Liability Litigation, MDL4
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 9 of 74Docket No. 2283, No. 8:11-mn-2000 (D.S.C.) (the “MDL Litigation”) (ECF Nos. 1, 7, 18, 20, 54,88);2 and1.11WHEREAS, GAF denies all allegations of fault, wrongdoing, or liabilitymade by Plaintiffs in the nine actions mentioned above and all such allegations made by plaintiffsin the other MDL Litigation actions; and1.12WHEREAS, the nine actions mentioned in subsections 1.1 – 1.9 abovecontain allegations pertaining to Timberline shingles manufactured at certain GAF plants,including allegations that such shingles are or were prone to premature cracking; and1.13WHEREAS, GAF and plaintiffs in the Other Actions (First Baptist Church,Green and Thompson) pending in the MDL Litigation are contemporaneously herewith enteringinto a separate settlement agreement (the “Mobile Settlement Agreement”) and such settlementwill cover all persons and entities who are Qualifying Owners (as defined therein) and SouthCarolina Qualifying Owners (as defined therein) who own any property located in the UnitedStates with Mobile Timberline Shingles (as defined therein) manufactured during the period fromJanuary 1, 1999 through December 31, 2007. Cash benefits may be available under the MobileSettlement Agreement to owners of Mobile Timberline Shingles manufactured during the periodfrom January 1, 1999 through December 31, 2007 that have cracked, split or torn or will crack,2The four Other Actions that are or were part of the MDL Litigation are Richard Godfrey, onbehalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. GAF Materials Corporation, No.12-cv-00341; First Baptist Church of Blairsville, on behalf of itself and all others similarlysituated v. GAF Materials Corporation, No. 12-cv-00087; John Green, on behalf of himself andall others similarly situated v. GAF Materials Corporation, No. 12-cv-00088; and CarrollThompson (formerly Jack Brooks and Ellen Brooks), on behalf of himself and all others similarlysituated v. GAF Materials Corporation, No. 11-cv-00983. The complaint in Godfrey wasvoluntarily dismissed by plaintiff in that action on July 30, 2012. (ECF No. 19.) The First BaptistChurch, Green and Thompson actions pertain to Timberline shingles manufactured at GAF’smanufacturing facility in Mobile, Alabama during a defined period and are the subject of aseparate and related settlement agreement.5
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 10 of 74split or tear prior to the end of the warranty period applicable to those shingles. In the samemanner as this Agreement (as described therein), the Mobile Settlement Agreement will be subjectto final court approval; and1.14WHEREAS, GAF is willing to enter into this Agreement to resolve allclaims of all Plaintiffs and all claims of the Settlement Class (as defined herein); and1.15WHEREAS, since at least 2011, Class Counsel have conducted anextensive investigation of facts and circumstances relevant to the allegations made in Plaintiffs’complaints, including consultations with experts, interviewing and deposing potential witnesses,conducting investigations of the properties of certain named Plaintiffs, other potential classmembers and a GAF manufacturing facility, reviewing information and evidence they haveobtained regarding the facts and circumstances alleged in the complaints, and researching andstudying the legal principles applicable to issues in the MDL Litigation; and1.16WHEREAS, all counsel in the MDL Litigation recognize that claimspertaining to Timberline shingles manufactured at GAF’s manufacturing plants other than theplant at Mobile, Alabama are different in some aspects than claims made pertaining to Timberline shingles manufactured at GAF’s Mobile, Alabama plant; and1.17WHEREAS, the Parties have engaged in extensive, arm’s-lengthnegotiations regarding the settlement of claims involving Timberline shingles manufactured atGAF’s plants around the country; and1.18WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and Class Counsel have evaluated the time andexpense that will be necessary to prosecute these consolidated multidistrict cases to final judgment,the delays that are likely before any judgment may be entered, and the uncertainty inherent in anycomplex litigation such as this and, based upon such evaluation, have concluded that further6
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 11 of 74proceedings in these actions are likely to be protracted, complex and expensive, and that theoutcome is uncertain; and1.19WHEREAS, without conceding any lack of merit of any of their claims,Plaintiffs and Class Counsel have concluded that it is in the best interests of the Settlement Class tosettle these actions on the terms set forth herein, and that the settlement with GAF embodied in thisAgreement is fair, reasonable and adequate to Plaintiffs and the members of the Settlement Class;and1.20WHEREAS, while denying any fault, wrongdoing or liability, and relyingon the provisions of this Agreement that the settlement embodied herein shall in no event beconstrued as or deemed to be evidence of an admission or a concession on the part of GAF (or anyof its predecessors, successors, parent or subsidiary companies, affiliates, officers, directors,agents, attorneys, representatives, insurers, suppliers, distributors or vendors) of any fault,wrongdoing, or liability whatsoever, or that any of the allegations in the complaints are correct,and without conceding any infirmity in its defenses, GAF considers it desirable to enter into thisAgreement in order to avoid further expense, to dispose of burdensome and protracted litigation,and to avoid the uncertain outcome of proceeding with this litigation.1.21WHEREAS, the parties desire not only to end further burdensome andprotracted litigation but also desire to create the claims process that is set forth below in Section 7.NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between GAF and Plaintiffs,acting for themselves and the Settlement Class, by and through their respective attorneys, that,except as specifically stated to the contrary in this Agreement, all of the allegations, claims,demands, causes of action, and liabilities, which have been or could have been asserted byPlaintiffs or any other member of the Settlement Class relating to, arising out of, or in connection7
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 12 of 74with any of the allegations made in the complaints, shall be settled and compromised, and eachmember of the Settlement Class (other than those who opt out as described in section 13 below)shall release GAF as set forth in section 6 below, and these actions shall be dismissed withprejudice, according to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.2.DEFINITIONSAs used in this Agreement, its exhibits, and any other documents contemplated bythis Agreement, and any amendments thereto, the following terms shall have the meanings setforth below. Terms used in the singular shall be deemed to include the plural and vice versa.2.1“Additional Price Per Square” shall have the meaning set forth in2.2“Agreement” shall mean this Amended Settlement Agreement.2.3“Causation Defenses” shall have the meaning set forth in subsection 5.7.2.4“Claim” shall mean a claim submitted by a Settlement Class Member tosubsection 9.3.GAF or its agent in accordance with the procedures set forth in section 7 of this Agreement seekingcompensation for Cracked Non-Mobile Timberline Shingles.2.5“Claim Form” shall mean the form, provided by GAF or its agent, that aSettlement Class Member is to submit with the Claim Kit as set forth in subsection 7.4.2.6“Claim Kit” shall mean the information, documents and materials,including the Claim Form, that a Settlement Class Member must submit under the Claims Programto process the Settlement Class Member’s Claim, the contents of which will substantially conformto subsection 7.4.2.7“Claim Opening Date” shall have the meaning set forth in subsection 7.4.8
8:11-mn-02000-JMC2.8Date Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 13 of 74“Claims Period” shall mean the time period beginning on the Effective Dateand ending seven (7) years later. During that period, Settlement Class Members may submitClaims in accordance with the Claims Program.2.9“Claims Program” shall mean the procedures set forth in section 7 for theadministration of Claims.2.10“Class Counsel” shall mean the law firms who represent Plaintiffs in theabove-captioned MDL Litigation, all of whom have appeared in one or more of the actions towhich reference is made in subsections 1.1 to 1.9:Co-Lead Counsel:Shawn M. RaiterLarson King, LLP30 East 7th Street, Suite 2800St. Paul, MN 55101Tel.: (651) 312-6518Fax: 651-312-6615Email: sraiter@larsonking.comCo-Lead Counsel:Charles J. LaDucaCuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP8120 Woodmont Ave., Suite 810Bethesda, MD 20814Tel.: (202) 789-3960Fax: 202-789-1813Email: charlesl@cuneolaw.comClass Counsel:Christopher Luke CoffinPendley Baudin and Coffin24110 Eden StreetPlaquemine, LA 70765Tel.: (225) 687-6396Email: ccoffin@pbclawfirm.comClass Counsel:Gary E MasonWhitfield Bryson & Mason LLP1625 Massachusetts Ave. NWSte. 605Washington, DC 20036Tel.: (202) 429-2290Email: gmason@wbmllp.comMichael A. McShaneAudet & Partners, LLP221 Main Street, Suite 1460San Francisco, CA 94105Tel.: (415) 982-1776Email: mmcshane@audetlaw.comClayton HalunenMelissa W. WolchanskyHalunen & Associates1650 IDS Center80 South Eight StreetMinneapolis, MN 55402Tel.: (612) 605-4098Email: Halunen@halunenlaw.comEmail: wolchansky@halunenlaw.com9
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 14 of 74Robert K. ShelquistLockridge Grindal Nauen PLLP100 Washington Avenue SouthSuite 2200Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel.: (612) 339-6900Email: rshelquist@locklaw.comJordan L. ChaikinParker Waichman LLP3301 Bonita Beach RoadSuite 101Bonita Springs, FL 34134Tel.: (800) 968-7529Email: jchaikin@yourlawyer.comDennis ReichReich & Binstock, LLP4265 San Felipe, Suite 1000Houston, TX 77027Tel.: (713) 622-7271Email: dreich@reichandbinstock.comC. Dorian BrittTate Law Group, LLC2 East Bryan Street, Suite 600Savannah, GA 31401Tel.: (912) 373-7454Email: dbritt@tatelawgroup.comJohn Gordon Rudd , Jr.David M. CialkowskiZimmerman Reed, P.L.L.P.1100 IDS Center80 South 8th StreetMinneapolis, MN 55402Tel.: (612) 341-0400Email: gordon.rudd@zimmreed.comEmail: david.cialkowski@zimmreed.comCharles E. SchafferLevin Fishbein Sedran and Berman510 Walnut StreetSuite 500Philadelphia, PA 19106Tel.: (215) 592-1500Email: cschaffer@lfsblaw.comPatrick F. MaddenLawrence DeutschShanon J. CarsonBerger and Montague, P.C.1622 Locust StreetPhiladelphia, PA 19103Tel.: (215) 875-3000Email: pmadden@bm.netEmail: ldeutsch@bm.netEmail: scarson@bm.net2.11“Coordinating Class Counsel” shall mean:Charles J. LaDucaCuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP8120 Woodmont Ave., Suite 810Bethesda, MD 20814Tel.: (202) 789-3960Fax: 202-789-1813Shawn M. RaiterLarson King, LLP30 East 7th Street, Suite 2800St. Paul, MN 55101Tel.: (651) 312-6518Fax: 651-312-661510
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 15 of 74Email: sraiter@larsonking.comEmail: charlesl@cuneolaw.comRobert K. ShelquistLockridge Grindal Nauen PLLP100 Washington Avenue SouthSuite 2200Minneapolis, MN 55401Tel.: (612) 339-6900Email: rshelquist@locklaw.comMichael McShaneAudet & Partners LLP221 Main Street, Ste 1460San Francisco, CA 94105415-982-17762.12“Court” or “this Court” shall mean the United States District Court for theDistrict of South Carolina.2.13“Cracked Non-Mobile Timberline Shingles” shall mean Non-MobileTimberline Shingles manufactured during the period from January 1, 1998 through December 31,2009 that have cracked, split or torn.2.14“Deficiency Notice” shall have the meaning set forth in subsection 7.11.2.15“Effective Date” shall have the meaning set forth in subsection 3.2.2.16“Eligible Claimant” shall mean a Settlement Class Member who submits aClaim that is deemed eligible for compensation pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. Theparties agree that Susan D. Ashley, Thomas Byrd, Kathleen Erickson, Tina Griffin, Diane Haner,Sybil McDaniel, James Morocco, Angela Posey and Michael Ragan are “Eligible Claimants.”2.17“Exhibit” shall mean any and all exhibits attached to this Agreement.2.18“Final Approval Hearing” shall mean the hearing required by Federal Ruleof Civil Procedure 23(e), following appropriate notice to the Settlement Class and an opportunityfor Settlement Class Members to exclude themselves from (i.e., opt out of) the Settlement Classand/or file objections, at which time the Parties will request that the Court approve the fairness,reasonableness and adequacy of this Agreement and enter the Final Order and Judgment.11
8:11-mn-02000-JMC2.19Date Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 16 of 74“Final Order and Judgment” shall mean the Court’s approval, at orfollowing the Final Approval Hearing, of this Agreement, if any such approval be forthcoming, insubstantially the form advocated by the Parties to this Agreement.2.20“GAF Limited Warranty” shall mean The GAF Smart Choice ShingleLimited Warranty. Versions of the GAF Limited Warranty applicable to Timberline shinglesmanufactured by GAF, during the period from January 1, 1998 through December 31, 2009, areattached hereto as Exhibit A.2.21“Independent Claim Investigator” shall mean the person or firm appointedpursuant to the procedures set forth in subsection 7.17.2.22“Material Price Per Square” shall have the meaning set forth in subsection2.23“MDL Litigation” shall mean the multi-district litigation proceeding in this9.3.Court captioned In re Building Materials Corporation of America Asphalt Roofing ShingleProducts Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2283, No. 8:11-mn-2000 (D.S.C.).2.24“Mobile Settlement Agreement” shall mean the settlement agreemententered into by GAF and plaintiffs contemporaneously herewith in the Other Actions pending inthe MDL Litigation as described above in subsection 1.13.2.25“Non-Approved Roof Substrates” shall mean (i) decks which are notconstructed of an APA-rated exterior grade plywood or APA-rated OSB board (all of which musthave a minimum thickness of 3/8”) or decks which are constructed of wood boards over six inchesin width; (ii) decks which are constructed of materials such as but not limited to Homasote Board,Tectum, Gypsum, or nailable concrete; or (iii) substrates where Timberline shingles have been12
8:11-mn-02000-JMCDate Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 17 of 74applied directly to any type of roof insulation such as wood fiber, foam, organic, or perliteinsulation.2.26“Non-Mobile Timberline Shingles” shall mean GAF Timberline shinglesmanufactured at any of GAF’s plants other than its Mobile, Alabama plant.2.27“Notice of Denial” shall mean a written notice provided by GAF that deniesall or part of a Claim.2.28“Original Owner” shall mean the person or entity who owned a structure atthe time when any Timberline shingles that are the subject of this Agreement were installed onthe roof of such structure.2.29“Other Building Materials” shall mean anything directly connected toNon-Mobile Timberline Shingles or the Roof System including but not limited to flashings,gutters, siding, valley metal, crickets and saddles, plumbing vents, and soffit and fascia.2.30“Other Damages” shall mean (i) cost of labor and (ii) any damage to (a) theRoof System and (b) Other Building Materials.2.31“Parties” shall mean Plaintiffs and GAF.2.32“Plaintiffs” shall mean Susan D. Ashley, Thomas Byrd, Kathleen Erickson,Tina Griffin, Diane Haner, Sybil McDaniel, James Morocco, Angela Posey and Michael Ragan,named plaintiffs in the nine above-captioned actions, described in subsections 1.1 through 1.9above.2.33“Preliminary Approval Order” shall have the meaning set forth in section11.13
8:11-mn-02000-JMC2.34Date Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 18 of 74“Qualifying Owner” shall mean (i) Original Owners and (ii) QualifyingSubsequent Owners. A Qualifying Owner may be either an Original Owner or a QualifyingSubsequent Owner with respect to a particular roof.2.35“Qualifying Subsequent Owner” shall mean a person or entity who (1) is asecond owner of a structure on which Timberline shingles were installed on the roof and whonotified GAF in writing within a specified period required under the terms of the GAF LimitedWarranty applicable to such shingles of the transfer of ownership of the structure upon which suchshingles were installed on the roof, or (2) at the time of transfer of ownership of the structure uponwhich such shingles were installed on the roof, was entitled under the law of the state in which theproperty is located to the automatic transfer of the Original Owner’s rights under the GAF LimitedWarranty applicable to such shingles.2.36“Release” shall have the meaning set forth in section 6.2.37“Roof System” shall mean the associated roof structure and roofing systemincluding, but not limited to, the roof deck, underlayment, leak barriers, starter strips, ridge capshingles, and attic ventilation.2.38“Settlement” shall mean the terms and conditions set forth in this2.39“Settlement Class” shall have the meaning set forth in subsection 4.1 withAgreement.the exclusions set forth in subsection 4.2.2.40“Settlement Class Member” shall mean a member of the Settlement Class.2.41“Smart Choice Protection Period” shall mean the initial, non-proratedperiod of compensation under the GAF Limited Warranty applicable to any particular EligibleClaimant’s shingles as provided more fully in the applicable GAF Limited Warranty.14
8:11-mn-02000-JMC2.42Date Filed 12/02/14Entry Number 117-2Page 19 of 74“Special Master” shall mean a person to be appointed by the Court pursuantto Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 53 and subsection 8.1.2.43“Square” shall mean a sufficient number of shingles to cover 100 squarefeet of roof. Shingles are packaged in “bundles” and are commonly packaged three bundles to aSquare.2.44“Subsequent Claim” shall mean claims submitted pursuant to the terms ofthis Agreement for Non-Mobile Timberline Shingles for which compensation has not alreadybeen paid.2.45“Third Party Claims Administrator” shall mean the third party retained byGAF, who will, at GAF’s direction and request, assist GAF with the initial intake of claims,including (i) answering telephone calls, (ii) monitoring and responding to email and websiterequests, (iii) mailing Claims Kits, (iv) receiving claim forms and supporting documentation, (v)assigning claim numbers, (vi) reviewing claims for completeness (i.e., verifying that a claimincludes the documentation and material
GAF Materials Corporation, No. 11-cv-02784 (D.S.C.); and 1.9 WHEREAS, a putative class action brought by plaintiff Michael Ragan on behalf of owners of structures located within Pennsylvania or, alternatively, within certain of the United States, on which Timberline shingles manufactured at GAF's manufacturing facility in
