case 1:15-cv-13114-mlw document 85 filed 11/18/19 page 4 of 5 certificate of service i hereby...

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

WILLIAM McGEE and LEE McGEE, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

CONSTANT CONTACT, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

) No. 1:15-cv-13114-MLW ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CLASS ACTION

AFFIDAVIT OF DARREN J. ROBBINS

______________ )

Case 1:15-cv-13114-MLW Document 85 Filed 11/18/19 of 5

I, Darren J. Robbins, affirm as follows:

1. I am an attorney at law, licensed to practice in the State of California, and a member

of the firm Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP ("Robbins Geller"). Robbins Geller serves as

counsel to Lead Plaintiff North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District Firefighters' Pension Plan

(f/k/a North Naples Fire Control and Rescue District Firefighters' Pension Plan) ("North Collier")

in the above-captioned action. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated in this Affidavit, and

I am competent to testify to them.

I am familiar with the Monitoring Agreement, entered into by Robbins Geller and North

Collier in 2014, which Robbins Geller believes contains confidential, competitively sensitive

information. In particular, the Monitoring Agreement describes Robbins Geller's proprietary

processes and procedures. Robbins Geller believes that the disclosure of the entirety of the terms

of the Monitoring Agreement would harm its competitive standing, as other firms attempting to

offer similar services would likely attempt to utilize the information, framework and approach

memorialized in the Monitoring Agreement for their own use. For these reasons, Robbins Geller

is providing the Court the unredacted version of the Monitoring Agreement in camera for the

Court's review and respectfully requests that the Monitoring Agreement be impounded pursuant

to Local Rule 7.2.

2. The Monitoring Agreement does not reference Constant Contact, Inc., the

defendants in this case, the statements at issue in this case, or any other aspect of this litigation.

Thus, it is Robbins Geller's position that the Monitoring Agreement is of minimal (if any) interest

to the public. See, e.g., In re Morgan Stanley Mortg. Pass-Through Certificates Litig., No. 09-

CV-02137 (LTS)(SN), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127767 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 6, 2013).

- 1 -


3. I am also familiar with the September 2015 retention agreement pursuant to which

North Collier retained Robbins Geller and Sugarman & Susskind, P.A. in connection with this

litigation (the "Retention Agreement"). The Retention Agreement for this case provides legal

impressions as well as terms of the retention. The Retention Agreement is an attorney-client

communication. Moreover, the Retention Agreement includes provisions that go beyond the

question of the fairness of the proposed settlement and any attorneys' fees and expense award to

be determined by the Court. Robbins Geller believes that the Court should order the impoundment

of the unredacted version of the Retention Agreement.

4. Redacted versions of the Monitoring Agreement and the Retention Agreement are

being filed contemporaneously herewith.

Executed this 18th day of November, 2019, at San Diego, California.

.. l~OBBINS

A Notary Public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

State of California ) ) ss:

County of San Diego )

On l'Lb~'<>er ,~\ 9,.D\~ before me, Ue)O~ ·o. ~© personally appeared U1ntl'C\A.... <J . Qck)aj ('i.) who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the

person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/shefthey xecutcd the same in his/her/th ir authorized capacity(+es , and that by J1is/herftbeir signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

- 2 -


WI1NESS my hand and official seal.

Commission expires: 10/zl~

- 3 -


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on November 18, 2019, I electronically filed the foregoing with

the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the

e-mail addresses denoted on the Court’s Electronic Mail Notice List, and I hereby certify that I

have caused to be mailed the foregoing document or paper via the United States Postal Service to

the non-CM/ECF participants indicated on the Court’s Manual Notice List.

/s/ Ellen Gusikoff Stewart ELLEN GUSIKOFF STEWART


case 1:15-cv-13114-mlw document 85 filed 11/18/19 page 4 of 5 certificate of service i hereby...

Documents