Case 2:11-cv-01754-JAD Document 621-14 Filed 07/23/20 Page 1 of 28 PageID: 48307
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit K
`
`

`

`Case 2:11-cv-01754-JAD Document 621-14 Filed 07/23/20 Page 2 of 28 PageID: 48308
`
`
`
`
`
` UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
`
`Williams v. BASF Catalysts LLC, et al, C.A. No. 2:11-cv-01754.
`
`If you or a close relative were ever a plaintiff in a
`lawsuit against Eastern Magnesia Talc Company,
`Engelhard Corporation or BASF Catalysts, LLC
`based on an asbestos-related personal injury or
`wrongful death due to exposure to Emtal Talc, you
`could receive a payment from a proposed Class
`Action Settlement.
`
`A Federal Court has authorized this Notice. This is not a solicitation from a lawyer.
`
` A proposed Class Action Settlement (“the Settlement”) will provide a Settlement Fund of
`$72.5 million to pay claims submitted by asbestos-related personal injury claimants or their
`surviving heirs, if deceased, who are Class Members. The fund will be established by the
`Court authorizing this Notice.
`
` •
`
`• To qualify for monetary compensation, a person must:
`
`• at any time between March 8, 1984 and March 29, 2011, have filed and served a
`lawsuit against Engelhard Corporation (“Engelhard”), or one of its subsidiaries (such
`as Eastern Magnesia Talc Company), or BASF Catalysts, LLC (“BASF”), which
`acquired Engelhard and its subsidiaries in June 2006, seeking asbestos bodily injury
`compensation or other relief arising from exposure to Emtal Talc, and
`
`• before March 30, 2011, have either:
`
`(A) voluntarily dismissed or terminated the lawsuit as to Engelhard/BASF after
`the suit was filed, including any voluntary dismissal or release of claims due to
`settlement; OR
`
`(B) had their lawsuit as to Engelhard/BASF involuntarily dismissed by the
`presiding Court.
`
`“Person” includes any individual or entity who has or had the right to claim damages
`relating to Emtal Talc exposure either in their own right because of an asbestos bodily
`injury allegedly sustained as result of claimed exposure to Emtal Talc in any form or
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:11-cv-01754-JAD Document 621-14 Filed 07/23/20 Page 3 of 28 PageID: 48309
`
`
`
`
`manner, or as an individual who may had have a right to damages based on an asbestos
`injured person’s injury or death such as, spouses, heirs, legatees, personal representatives,
`or wrongful death beneficiaries.
`
`Authorized representatives of deceased, legally incapacitated or incompetent person
`qualifying as a Class Member and family members of deceased persons qualifying as a
`Class Member who meet certain criteria may also file claims for monetary awards.
`
`• Engelhard mined, milled, and marketed Emtal talc in the United States from 1967 through
`1984, and sold and distributed it to companies for various industrial and commercial
`applications. Exposure to Emtal Talc may have happened in a variety of manners and occurred
`occupationally. This lawsuit, however, does not involve exposure to any personal cosmetic
`product such as baby, body, or talcum powder.
`
`• Your or your family member’s asbestos personal injury claim lawyer or law firm may have
`information to assist you in determining if you qualify as class member.
`
`• Your legal rights are affected whether you act or don’t act. Read this Notice carefully.
`
`• These rights and options—and the deadlines within which to exercise them—are explained in
`this Notice.
`
`• The Court in charge of this case still has to decide whether to approve the Settlement.
`Payments will be made only if the Court approves the Settlement and after any appeals are
`resolved. Please be patient.
`
`YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS AND OPTIONS IN THIS SETTLEMENT:
`
`STAY IN THE SETTLEMENT
`CLASS AND SUBMIT A
`CLAIM BY ________
`
`The only way to get a payment.
`
`To receive monetary benefits, you will need to timely submit a
`claim to the Settlement Fund’s Administrator. However, if the
`Court approves the Settlement you will be bound by the terms
`and release contained in the Settlement even if you do not submit
`a claim, unless you exclude yourself as described below.
`
`EXCLUDE YOURSELF
`
`Get no payment.
`
`This option allows you to pursue a lawsuit against defendant
`BASF, defendant Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP and any of their
`co-defendants about the legal claims in this case. It also is the
`only option that allows you to ever be part of any other lawsuit
`against BASF or the other parties being released under the
`Settlement Agreement for any asbestos-related personal injury or
`wrongful death claim, whether the injury or claim is known or
`unknown, including any potential subsequent asbestos-related
`personal injury or wrongful death claim that may arise in the
`future.
`
`OBJECT
`
`Write to the Court if you do not like the Settlement.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:11-cv-01754-JAD Document 621-14 Filed 07/23/20 Page 4 of 28 PageID: 48310
`
`
`
`
`GO TO A HEARING
`
`DO NOTHING
`
`Ask to speak in Court about the fairness of the Settlement.
`
`If you do nothing you will remain in the Class Action as a Class
`Member and will not, in the future, be able to pursue any other
`lawsuit against BASF, Cahill or the other parties being released
`under the Settlement Agreement for any asbestos injury or
`wrongful death claim, known, unknown or potential, including
`any possible secondary disease or second asbestos injury claim
`that may arise in the future. If you do not timely file a complete
`Claim Submission with the Administrator, you will not
`receive compensation.
`
`The deadline to file a Claim Submission is ______.
`
`
`
`Important dates and deadlines:
`
`Class Membership Exclusion (opt-out) Deadline
`
`(To be added)
`
`Claim Submission Deadline
`
`(To be added)
`
`
`
`
`
`Objection and Intervention Submission Deadline
`
`(To be added)
`
`Fairness Hearing
`
`(To be added)
`
`
`
`This Notice is only a summary of the Settlement Agreement, the Plan of Distribution and your
`rights. You are encouraged to carefully review the complete Settlement Agreement and Plan of
`Distribution at www.EmtalTalcSettlement.com. The Settlement Agreement and Plan of
`Distribution are also on file in the office of the Clerk of the Court for the U.S. District Court for
`the District of New Jersey in Newark, New Jersey (see Question __for the address). You can also
`get this information by calling 1-8XX-000-0000 and requesting copies.
`
`Please do not write, email or call the Court or Clerk of Court for additional information.
`
`What This Notice Contains
`1. Why did I get this Notice? .................................................................................................... 5
`
`2. What is this lawsuit? ............................................................................................................. 5
`
`3. What is a class action? .......................................................................................................... 6
`
`4. What are the claims, issues and defenses in this class action? ............................................. 7
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:11-cv-01754-JAD Document 621-14 Filed 07/23/20 Page 5 of 28 PageID: 48311
`
`
`
`
`5. How many class members are there? .................................................................................... 8
`
`6. Why is there a settlement? .................................................................................................... 9
`
`WHO IS INCLUDED IN THE SETTLEMENT? ..................................................................................... 10
`
`7. How do I know I am a class member? ................................................................................ 10
`
`8. What if I am not sure whether I am included in the Settlement Class? .............................. 11
`
`9. Do I need to hire a lawyer to represent me in the Settlement? ....................................... 12
`
`THE SETTLEMENT’S BENEFITS—WHAT YOU GET AND WHAT YOU GIVE UP ............................ 12
`
`10. What does the Settlement provide? .................................................................................. 12
`
`11. When and how will the Settlement Fund be distributed to Settlement Class Members? . 12
`
`12.
`
` How much money will I receive in the Settlement? ....................................................... 13
`
`13. What am I surrendering by staying in the Settlement Class? ........................................... 19
`
`HOW TO GET A PAYMENT—SUBMITTING A CLAIM FORM ........................................................... 19
`
`14. What must be done to get a monetary payment from the Settlement Fund? .................... 19
`
`15. How can I submit a claim to get a monetary payment? ................................................... 20
`
`Is there a time limit to file claims for monetary awards or to complete Claim
`16.
`Submissions? ............................................................................................................................... 20
`
`17. When would I get my payment if eligible? ...................................................................... 21
`
`18. Can I challenge or dispute the Administrator’s determination of my monetary award
`claim?21
`
`19. How do I get out, or exclude myself (opt out) of the Settlement? ................................... 21
`
`If I do not exclude myself (opt out), can I sue BASF, Cahill and the other released Parties
`20.
`for the same thing later? .............................................................................................................. 22
`
`21.
`
` If I exclude myself, can I still get a payment? ................................................................. 22
`
`THE LAWYERS REPRESENTING YOU ............................................................................................. 22
`
`22. Do I have a lawyer in this case? ....................................................................................... 22
`
`23. How will the lawyers be paid? ......................................................................................... 23
`
`24. Are the class representatives being paid any compensation for their services? ............... 24
`
`25. What’s the difference been objecting to the Settlement and excluding yourself from the
`Settlement? .................................................................................................................................. 25
`
`THE COURT’S FAIRNESS HEARING ................................................................................................ 25
`
`26. When and where will the Court decide whether to approve the Settlement? ................... 25
`
`27. Do I need to come to the hearing? .................................................................................... 25
`
`28. May I speak at the hearing? .............................................................................................. 26
`
`IF YOU DO NOTHING ...................................................................................................................... 26
`
`GETTING MORE INFORMATION ..................................................................................................... 27
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:11-cv-01754-JAD Document 621-14 Filed 07/23/20 Page 6 of 28 PageID: 48312
`
`29. Are there more details about this Settlement? .................................................................. 27
`
`30. How do I get more information? ...................................................................................... 27
`
`BASIC INFORMATION
`
`1.
`
`Why did I get this Notice?
`
`You, someone in your family, or someone for whom you were a personal representative
`may have been a party in an asbestos injury or wrongful death lawsuit filed between March 8,
`1984 and March 29, 2011, that named as a defendant Engelhard Corporation (“Engelhard”) or
`BASF Catalysts, LLC (“BASF”) or one of their subsidiary or affiliated companies (identified later
`on in this document), which lawsuit was voluntarily or involuntarily dismissed. BASF acquired
`Engelhard Corporation in June 2006 through a merger transaction. (Collectively Engelhard, BASF
`and its subsidiary/affiliates are referred to as “Engelhard/BASF”). During this period of time,
`numerous lawsuits were filed against Engelhard/BASF alleging that asbestos injuries were caused
`through exposure to Emtal Talc, the brand name under which Engelhard’s subsidiaries marketed
`the talc it produced. These now-dismissed lawsuits together involved thousands of individuals
`and are referred to as the “Underlying Lawsuits.”
`
`After the Underlying Lawsuits were dismissed or resolved, a dispute developed about
`whether information concerning the existence of asbestos in Emtal Talc was concealed or
`misrepresented by Engelhard/BASF and its national defense coordination law firm, Cahill Gordon
`& Reindel (“Cahill”), which in turn may have led to the unfair dismissal of asbestos lawsuits
`against Engelhard/BASF. The dismissals of these Underlying Lawsuits as to
`Engelhard/BASF are presently the subject of a proposed class action lawsuit pending in the United
`States District Court for the District of New Jersey (the “Court”). The case is known as Williams,
`et al v BASF Catalysts, LLC, et. al, C.A. No. 2:11-cv-01754.
`
`The people who sued are called the Plaintiffs. The people or companies they sued are
`called the Defendants. They are more fully identified below.
`
`The Court sent you this Notice because you have a right to know about a proposed
`settlement of a class action lawsuit and about your options before the Court decides whether to
`give final approval of the Settlement. If the Court approves the Settlement and after any objections
`and appeals are resolved, an Administrator appointed by the Court will make the payments that
`the Settlement allows.
`
`This package explains the lawsuit, the Settlement, your legal rights, what benefits are
`available, who is eligible for them, and how to get them, along with what claims and rights you
`would surrender in exchange if the Settlement is approved by the Court and implemented.
`
`2.
`
`What is this lawsuit?
`
`This is a federal court class action pending in the United States District Court for the
`District of New Jersey since 2011. The Plaintiffs contend that the Defendants named in the lawsuit
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:11-cv-01754-JAD Document 621-14 Filed 07/23/20 Page 7 of 28 PageID: 48313
`
`
`
`
`misled the attorneys representing them or their respective deceased family members in Underlying
`Lawsuits against Engelhard/BASF about the existence of asbestos in Emtal Talc to support
`Engelhard/BASF’s defense that Emtal Talc did not contain asbestos. Plaintiffs contend these
`actions led to unfair settlements and/or dismissals of their or their deceased relatives’ Underlying
`Lawsuits as to Engelhard/BASF, as well as to unfair settlements and dismissals of other asbestos
`claimants’ lawsuits against Engelhard/BASF similar to theirs.
`
` “Emtal Talc,” was a brand of industrial talc sold by a subsidiary of Engelhard that was
`
`used in the manufacturing of various industrial products, such as tires and other rubber goods,
`paints, plaster, caulking, and auto-body repair compounds. This lawsuit does not involve exposure
`to any personal cosmetic product such as baby, body or talcum powder.
`
`Engelhard was a chemical company that closed its talc mine in 1984. The Emtal Talc
`
`business was a small business within Engelhard, itself a large mining and minerals trading
`company. BASF bought Engelhard in June 2006.
`
`Plaintiffs claim that from 1984 until 2009, Engelhard (BASF acquired Engelhard in 2006),
`
`its former national law firm Cahill, and employees of the two companies, made misstatements or
`concealed evidence about the existence of alleged asbestos in Emtal Talc and failed to disclose
`related information to plaintiffs, their lawyers, and courts in the Underlying Lawsuits. Plaintiffs
`claim that due to these misstatements and omissions, the plaintiffs in the Underlying Lawsuits
`either (1) voluntarily agreed to dismiss or settle their cases for less than they otherwise would
`have accepted or (2) had their cases involuntarily dismissed by court order upon motions filed by
`the Defendants. Defendants deny Plaintiffs’ allegations and dispute that any statements about
`Emtal Talc affected the outcome of the Underlying Lawsuits because (1) the claims in the
`Underlying Lawsuits were without merit, (2) the amount of asbestos in Emtal Talc, as reported in
`historical documents, could not have caused harm to human health, and (3) many of the
`Underlying Lawsuits were resolved for fixed amounts irrespective of the alleged asbestos content
`of the talc or the number of talc defendants. Defendants further contend that many of the
`complaints merely named Engelhard without any specific allegations regarding product
`identification, exposure, or damages. Plaintiffs dispute these arguments.
`
`3. What is a class action?
`
`In a class action, one or more persons, the named plaintiffs (who are also called proposed
`
`“class representatives”) sue on behalf of themselves and other persons with similar claims. All of
`these people together are the proposed “Class” or “Class Members.” When a class action is
`settled, one Court resolves the issues for all Class Members (in the settlement context, “Settlement
`Class Members”), except for those who exclude themselves (opt out) from the Settlement. U.S.
`Magistrate Judge Joseph A. Dickson is in charge of this class action. In this case, the proposed
`class representatives are Kimberlee Williams, Gayle Williams, Marilyn L. Holley, Sheila Ware,
`Donnette Wengerd, and Rosanne Chernick, who are heirs to the persons who originally sued
`Engelhard in the Underlying Lawsuits. Excluding yourself (opting out) means that you will not
`receive any benefits from the Settlement. The process for excluding yourself (opting out) is
`described in Question 19.
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:11-cv-01754-JAD Document 621-14 Filed 07/23/20 Page 8 of 28 PageID: 48314
`
`
`
`
`4. What are the claims, issues and defenses in this class action?
`
`Plaintiffs claim that the Defendants caused harm to Class Members through misstatements
`
`or concealing evidence in connection with the Underlying Lawsuits brought against
`Engelhard/BASF after March 7, 1984 and before March 29, 2011. Plaintiffs allege that, in
`defending these cases, Defendants claimed through communications to courts and plaintiffs’
`lawyers, discovery responses, affidavits, and pleadings that:
`
`• Emtal Talc did not contain asbestos;
`
`• No evidence existed that Emtal Talc contained asbestos; and
`
`• No Engelhard employee had ever testified about whether Emtal Talc contained asbestos.
`
`Through discovery in this lawsuit, Class Counsel obtained documents that purported to
`
`identify asbestos in some samples of Emtal Talc as well as testimony from former Engelhard
`scientists and reports from outside laboratories that purported to show asbestos in Emtal Talc.
`Plaintiffs claim that this information and the documents identified were wrongly concealed from
`plaintiffs in the Underlying Lawsuits in answers to discovery, in communications with
`Engelhard’s lawyers, and in motions filed with courts seeking dismissal of the Underlying
`Lawsuits. Plaintiffs further claim that Defendants supported these statements with affidavits they
`drafted and disseminated to convince plaintiffs in the Underlying Lawsuits and courts that Emtal
`Talc did not contain asbestos. Plaintiffs claim that, as a result of these misstatements and
`Defendants’ failure to disclose this evidence, plaintiffs in the Underlying Lawsuits (1) agreed to
`dismiss their personal injury claims against Engelhard (and later BASF); (2) settled them for less
`than they otherwise would have accepted; or (3) had their cases dismissed by court order for lack
`of proof that Emtal Talc contained asbestos.
`
`For their part, BASF and Cahill deny these contentions. They claim that the amount of
`
`asbestos reported to be found in the documents identified by class counsel are insufficient to cause
`harm to human health, dispute the merit of the Underlying Lawsuits, dispute the validity of some
`tests that Plaintiffs claim identify asbestos in certain samples of Emtal Talc, and dispute that any
`statements about Emtal Talc affected the outcome or settlement amounts of the Underlying
`Lawsuits. BASF also claims that it was not aware of the facts alleged by the Plaintiffs in this case
`when it bought Engelhard in 2006 and that BASF did not learn of the circumstances giving rise to
`Plaintiffs’ allegations in this case until 2009. Upon discovery of certain documents and
`information concerning Emtal Talc in 2009, BASF and its former counsel separated, and BASF
`retained new counsel which has represented it since 2009. BASF also states that it no longer
`defends Emtal Talc cases on the basis that there is no evidence that Emtal Talc contained asbestos.
`Nevertheless, BASF believes and continues to defend these cases on various grounds, including
`that there is no evidence that the reported levels of asbestos in Emtal Talc could cause harm to
`human health.
`
`The Williams Plaintiffs acknowledge the challenges to succeeding in this litigation. For
`
`instance, Class Members would need to prove that plaintiffs in the Underlying Lawsuits were
`damaged by an evidential record in those cases that did not contain the evidence Defendants are
`alleged to have concealed or made misstatements about. In addition, the District Court has ruled
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 2:11-cv-01754-JAD Document 621-14 Filed 07/23/20 Page 9 of 28 PageID: 48315
`
`that plaintiffs would be required to waive their attorney-client privilege to allow for discovery of
`otherwise confidential communications with their counsel in their Underlying Lawsuits as to what
`effect, if any, the alleged misrepresentations had on the plaintiffs or their lawyers in deciding to
`dismiss or settle with Engelhard in the Underlying Lawsuits. The District Court in Williams has
`already ordered discovery and disclosure by the named Plaintiffs and certain other class members
`of these types of attorney-client communications.
`
`Defendants also point to evidence developed during discovery in this case of modest
`settlements amounts (including in the hundreds of dollars) that some plaintiffs accepted in
`Underlying Lawsuits from other talc manufacturers despite evidence that their talc contained
`asbestos. These modest settlement amounts accepted from defendants for whom there was proof
`that their products contained asbestos were similar to what Engelhard paid some plaintiffs.
`Defendants also claim that case files from the Underlying Lawsuits produced during discovery
`give rise to other defenses that they could assert to support their contention that Defendants’
`actions did not cause the settlement or dismissal of the Underlying Lawsuits, such as (1) the
`absence of evidence of a plaintiff’s exposure to Emtal Talc; (2) that some claims were dismissed
`as untimely filed; (3) that other claims were filed in the wrong jurisdiction; or (4) claims were
`dismissed due to some other procedural or substantive reason not related to the asbestos content of
`Emtal Talc.
`
`Earlier in this litigation, Plaintiffs also claimed that Engelhard and Cahill had destroyed
`documents relating to Emtal Talc. This assertion was made on Plaintiffs’ good-faith belief at the
`time that documents that should have existed no longer exist. However, Plaintiffs acknowledge
`that, through BASF’s efforts to address Plaintiffs’ allegations, BASF has since located thousands
`of documents relating to Emtal Talc, including testing documents that Plaintiffs believe show
`there was asbestos in Emtal Talc, documents that Plaintiffs claim were not provided to the
`plaintiffs in the Underlying Lawsuits. BASF has also located various other documents that
`Plaintiffs had believed were destroyed. Plaintiffs acknowledge that if they were to continue to
`allege document destruction, they would have to contend with the fact that BASF has located
`many additional documents since this litigation began. Plaintiffs further acknowledge that the
`essential key facts are now in the public domain from discovery in Williams and other litigation.
`On the other hand, BASF would have to contend with Plaintiffs’ assertion that some number of
`documents still have not been located and, therefore, were not produced in the Underlying
`Lawsuits.
`
`5.
`
`How many class members are there?
`
`A precise number of potential Class Members is not known due to the passage of time
`since the Underlying Lawsuits were first filed and dismissed, the deaths of many plaintiffs and
`their lawyers in the Underlying Lawsuits and the state or loss of records. Based on case census
`information obtained in discovery in Williams, case information provided by some of the law
`firms that represented claimants in the Underlying Lawsuits, and the review of other lawsuit
`complaints in which hundreds or thousands of purported asbestos claimants were joined into one
`lawsuit, Verus LLC, the asbestos claims administration firm that is advising Class Counsel, has
`estimated that there are 18,721 potential class members. This estimated number includes both the
`individuals who were the persons in the Underlying Lawsuits claiming to have suffered an
`asbestos-related personal injury or death (“Injured Persons”) as well as persons who sued
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 2:11-cv-01754-JAD Document 621-14 Filed 07/23/20 Page 10 of 28 PageID: 48316
`
`
`
`
`Engelhard/BASF derivatively based upon the Injured Person’s asbestos-related personal injury or
`death, such as a spouse or the children or personal representative a deceased Injured Person (these
`are defined as “Derivative Claimants”). Based on an analysis of information produced in
`discovery, social security numbers and claim records of potential class members who have filed
`asbestos bodily injury claims against defendants other than Engelhard/BASF, Verus estimates the
`number of class members who are Injured Persons is in the range of 7,500 to 8,500 persons.
`
`6. Why is there a settlement?
`
`After extensive litigation spanning more than eight years, which included an appeal to the
`
`Third Circuit Court of Appeals, extensive discovery (including the production of hundreds of
`thousands of pages of documents), many depositions, several protracted discovery disputes, and
`previously failed settlement initiatives, the Plaintiffs and Defendants have agreed to this
`Settlement.
`
`A settlement is an agreement between a plaintiff and a defendant to resolve a lawsuit.
`
`Settlements conclude without the court or a jury ruling in favor of the plaintiff or the defendant. A
`settlement allows the parties to avoid the cost and risk of a trial, as well as the delays of litigation.
`
`If the Court approves this Settlement, the litigation between the Settlement Class Members
`
`and the Defendants is concluded. Only Settlement Class Members are eligible for the benefits
`summarized in this Notice. The Defendants will no longer be legally responsible to defend against
`the claims by Settlement Class Members made in this litigation.
`
`The Court has not and will not decide in favor of the Plaintiffs or the Defendants. By
`
`reviewing this Settlement, the Court is not making and will not make any findings that any law
`was broken or that the Defendants did anything wrong. By entering into the Settlement
`Defendants are not admitting any of the claims made against them, which they continue to
`completely deny. Conversely, the Plaintiffs are not conceding that any of their claims against
`Defendants are invalid or without merit.
`
`Under the Settlement, BASF and Cahill will contribute a total of $72.5 million to a
`
`Settlement Fund for the benefit of the class identified in Question 7. The monetary awards to
`Settlement Class Members will vary based on the type of asbestos-related injury that the
`individual claimant developed. Details on how this Settlement Fund will be allocated and
`disbursed is described in a proposed Plan of Distribution that has been submitted to the Court in
`connection with the Settlement. In addition to funding the Settlement Fund, BASF and Cahill will
`pay the costs of providing notice to the class up to certain limits stated in Settlement Agreement,
`administration of the claims process, incentive awards to the Class Representatives, and will pay
`Class Counsel’s attorneys’ fees and cost reimbursement allowed by the Court.
`
`The Class Representatives and Class Counsel (see Question 22) believe that the proposed
`Settlement is best for everyone involved. The factors that Class Counsel considered included the
`uncertainty and delay associated with continued litigation, including trial and appeals, as well as
`the uncertainty of particular legal issues that are yet to be determined by the Court. Class Counsel
`balanced these and other substantial risks in determining that the Settlement is fair, reasonable and
`adequate in light of all circumstances and in the best interests of the Settlement Class Members.
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 2:11-cv-01754-JAD Document 621-14 Filed 07/23/20 Page 11 of 28 PageID: 48317
`
`
`
`
`WHO IS INCLUDED IN THE SETTLEMENT?
`
`
`
`To get money from the Settlement, you must first qualify as a Class Member.
`
`7.
`
`How do I know I am a class member?
`
`For settlement purposes the Court has defined the Class in this case to consist of the
`
`following:
`
`All Persons within the United States and its territories who after March 7, 1984
`and before March 30, 2011 filed and served a lawsuit against Engelhard/BASF
`seeking asbestos bodily injury or other relief arising from its Emtal Talc products,
`and who before March 30, 2011 either: (A) had voluntarily dismissed or
`terminated the lawsuit as to Engelhard/BASF either before or after the suit was
`filed, including any voluntary dismissal or release of claims due to settlement; or
`(B) had their lawsuit as to Engelhard/BASF involuntarily dismissed.
`
`The date on which a voluntary dismissal or termination occurred for purposes of
`
`determining class membership is the earlier of either (i) the date on which the agreement or
`consent by the plaintiff or his/her counsel to dismiss or terminate the lawsuit occurred; or (ii) the
`date on which the dismissal or termination of the lawsuit was entered by or in the court in which it
`was pending.
`
`A. Which Engelhard/BASF companies had to be named in the Underlying Lawsuits
`in order to qualify as a Class Member?
`
`In determining if a prior asbestos lawsuit qualifies a person as a Class Member,
`
`“Engelhard/BASF” means and includes the following companies: BASF Catalysts LLC, BASF
`Corporation, BASF CE, BASF SE, Engelhard Corporation, Engelhard Industries, Engelhard
`Minerals & Chemicals Corporation, Minerals & Chemicals Philip Corporation, Eastern Magnesia
`Talc Co., Porocel Corporation and Pita Realty Ltd.
`
`B. What if the injured claimant named in the Underlying Lawsuit is dead?
`
`The word “Person” in the definition includes any individual (or their estate if deceased)
`
`who claimed damages relating to an asbestos bodily injury allegedly sustained from exposure to
`Emtal Talc in any form or matter. This exposed, injured party (or his or her estate) is referred to in
`the Settlement as the “Injured Party” and in the Plan of Distributions as the “Primary Claimant”.
`
`Where the Injured Party is deceased, his or her personal representative--e.g.- Executor(trix)
`
`or Administrator(trix)--is a Class Member and is authorized to submit a claim submission for
`monetary compensation to the Settlement Fund.
`
`C. Do parties who sued Engelhard/BASF in Underlying Lawsuits as spouses or
`wrongful death claim beneficiaries qualify as class members?
`
`Yes. The word “Person” in the class definition includes the spouse, personal representative
`
`and wrongful death beneficiaries of the individual in the Underlying Lawsuits who is claimed to
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 2:11-cv-01754-JAD Document 621-14 Filed 07/23/20 Page 12 of 28 PageID: 48318
`
`have developed an asbestos-related injury where the person was named in the Underlying Lawsuit
`or the suit brought on his behalf in such capacity. Such parties are referred to as Derivative
`Claimants in the Settlement and there is a compensation component provided in the proposed Plan
`of Distribution for Derivative Claimants.
`
`For claims administration purposes all Derivative Claimants of an Injured Person who is
`the subject of an Underlying Lawsuit are treated as a group under the proposed Plan of
`Distribution.
`
`D. Are the attorne