Case: In re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation

1:06-cv-00732 | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Filed Date: Jan. 31, 2006

Closed Date: July 15, 2010

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On January 31, 2006 a group of participants in J.P. Morgan Chase's Retirement Plan filed suit under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq, in United Stated District Court of the Southern District of New York. The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, asked the Court for declaratory, injunctive and compensatory relief alleging that the defendant used cash balance formulas in a discriminatory manner based on age and for other violations of ERISA. Specifically, the plaintiffs contended that the defendant's cash balance plan helps their corporation save money and the older workers shoulder the burden; thus such a practice is discriminatory as it systemically harms a particular group. (Consolidated class-action complaint, page 1).

On October 30, 2006, the Court (Judge Baer) granted in part the defendants' motion to dismiss. The Court distinguished cash balance and "regular" pension plans. The major difference is the flexibility between the plans. A cash balance system allows the participant to take a lump sum after five years in the program. In re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation, 460 F.Supp.2d 482 (S.D.N.Y. 2006). This type of information is valuable to know as a participant in the plan, but this points to another problem with JP Morgan's version: there was not good publicity for these changes. In fact, counts IV-VI of the complaint alleged that failure to provide notice. In re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation, 460 F.Supp.2d 480 (S.D.N.Y. 2006). The Court did not dismiss those parts of the complaint, nor the parts about age discrimination. Thus, the plaintiffs continued to press in Court for class certification.

On May 30, 2007, the Court (Judge Baer) certified a class. The class was comprised of all plan participants, whether active, inactive or retired, their beneficiaries and Estates, whose accrued benefits or pension benefits are based in whole or in part on the Plan's cash balance formulas, from January 1, 2002 to present. In re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation, 242 F.R.D. 270 (S.D.N.Y. 2007). In essence, the class claim said more about what the plaintiffs failed to do, than what they did. The age discriminations through ERISA was being reviewed by a higher court, and the notices part of the complaint could only be certified from 2002 onwards. This according to the Court was a result of JP Morgan being such a large company; It was the factual diversity of the notice claims that posed an insurmountable hurdle to class certification of the notice claims. In re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation, 242 F.R.D. 274 (S.D.N.Y. 2007).

On July 31, 2007, the Court (Judge Baer) denied the plaintiffs motion to reconsider. Not only was the motion denied, but the opinion was written in a clearly frustrated tone. In the opinion, the Court accused the class counsel of not knowing the difference between confusion and hardship. In re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation, 2177019 WL 3 (S.D.N.Y. 2007). And at the end of the opinion, the Court States, that "the Clerk of the Court is instructed to close this motion and remove it from my docket." In re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation, 2177019 WL 3 (S.D.N.Y. 2007). Thus, not only is the litigation going poorly for the plaintiffs, but they are getting on the wrong side of the Court.

In light of this, on January 30, 2009, the parties entered into a Stipulation for Voluntary Dismissal of Certified Claims, according to which the Certified Claims would be dismissed with prejudice, and each party should bear its own costs and fees.

On October 19, 2009, the Court (Judge Cote) approved the parties' motion to dismiss the certified claims.

On July 15, 2010, the Court (Judge Cote) approved the parties' Settlement Agreement, according to which the plaintiffs' counsel was awarded $600,000 as reimbursement of costs and expenses.

show full summary

Summary Authors

Kunyi Zhang (9/9/2010)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4329057/parties/wilson-v-jp-morgan-chase-retirement-plan/

Judge(s)

Baer, Harold Jr. (New York)

Cote, Denise (New York)

Eaton, Douglas F. (New York)

Fox, Kevin N. (New York)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Ciolko, Edward W. (Pennsylvania)

Attorney for Defendant

Judge(s)

Baer, Harold Jr. (New York)

Cote, Denise (New York)

Eaton, Douglas F. (New York)

Fox, Kevin N. (New York)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Ciolko, Edward W. (Pennsylvania)

Gyandoh, Mark K. (New York)

Linden, Peter S. (New York)

Loeser, Derek W. (District of Columbia)

Meltzer, Joseph H. (Pennsylvania)

Pauk, Edgar (New York)

Riley, Erin M. (Washington)

Sarko, Lynn Lincoln (Washington)

Schiffrin, Richard S. (Pennsylvania)

Swope, Karin B. (Washington)

Trinko, Curtis V. (New York)

Watt, Andrew Thomas (New York)

Weeden, Joseph A. (Pennsylvania)

Williams-Derry, Amy C. (Washington)

Attorney for Defendant

Youngwood, Jonathan K. (New York)

Attorney Contact Information via CourtListener

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

	Document
1:06-cv-00732 1:06-cv-03300 1:06-cv-01249 1:06-cv-03031 1:07-cv-07379 1:06-cv-48184	Docket In Re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation	July 16, 2010	July 16, 2010 Docket
22 1:06-cv-00732	Consolidated class-action complaint In Re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation	May 25, 2006	May 25, 2006 Complaint
62 1:06-cv-00732	Order granting in part defendant's motion to dismiss In Re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation	Oct. 30, 2006	Oct. 30, 2006 Order/Opinion 460 F.Supp.2d 479
1:06-cv-00732	Order denying plaintiffs motion to compel In Re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation	May 21, 2007	May 21, 2007 Order/Opinion 2007 WL 1280623
98 1:06-cv-00732	Order granting class certification In Re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation	May 30, 2007	May 30, 2007 Order/Opinion 242 F.R.D. 265
107 1:06-cv-00732	Order denying motion for reconsideration and certification In Re J.P. Morgan Chase Cash Balance Litigation	July 31, 2007	July 31, 2007 Order/Opinion 2007 WL 2177019
146 1:06-cv-00732	Preliminary Order Related to Dismissl Proceedings	Feb. 2, 2009	Feb. 2, 2009 Order/Opinion
221 1:06-cv-00732	Order (Granting voluntary dismissal)	Oct. 19, 2009	Oct. 19, 2009 Order/Opinion
228 1:06-cv-00732	Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement	March 3, 2010	March 3, 2010 Order/Opinion
241 1:06-cv-00732	Final Judgment	July 15, 2010	July 15, 2010 Order/Opinion

show / hide documents

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4329057/wilson-v-jp-morgan-chase-retirement-plan/

Last updated Oct. 14, 2025, 12:10 a.m.

Change selected docket

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	Complaint	Jan. 31, 2006	Jan. 31, 2006 RECAP
2	Affidavit of Service Complaints	Feb. 10, 2006	Feb. 10, 2006 PACER
3	Stipulation and Order	Feb. 28, 2006	Feb. 28, 2006 PACER
4	Motion to Consolidate Cases	March 13, 2006	March 13, 2006 PACER
5	Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion 2 Exhibit A View on PACER 3 Exhibit B View on PACER	March 13, 2006	March 13, 2006 PACER
6	Declaration in Support of Motion 2 Text of Proposed Pretrial Order No. 1 View on PACER 3 Certificate of Service View on PACER	March 13, 2006	March 13, 2006 PACER
7	Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion 2 Exhibit A View on PACER 3 Exhibit B View on PACER 4 Certificate of Service View on PACER	March 16, 2006	March 16, 2006 PACER
10	Affidavit in Support of Motion 2 Exhibit A View on PACER 3 Exhibit B View on PACER 4 Exhibit C View on PACER 5 Exhibit D View on PACER	March 24, 2006	March 24, 2006 PACER
11	Affidavit of Service Other	March 24, 2006	March 24, 2006 PACER
8	Motion to Consolidate Cases 2 Text of Proposed Order View on PACER	March 24, 2006	March 24, 2006 PACER
9	Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion	March 24, 2006	March 24, 2006 PACER
12	Stipulation and Order	April 5, 2006	April 5, 2006 PACER
13	Rule 7.1 Corporate Disclosure Statement 2 Certificate of Service View on PACER	April 13, 2006	April 13, 2006 PACER
14	Endorsed Letter	May 5, 2006	May 5, 2006 PACER
15	Notice (Other)	May 8, 2006	May 8, 2006 PACER
16	Memorandum of Law in Support	May 8, 2006	May 8, 2006 PACER
17	Affidavit in Support 2 Exhibit A View on PACER 3 Exhibit B View on PACER 4 Exhibit C View on PACER 5 Exhibit D View on PACER	May 8, 2006	May 8, 2006 PACER
18	Memorandum of Law in Support	May 8, 2006	May 8, 2006 PACER
19	Certificate of Service Other	May 9, 2006	May 9, 2006 PACER
20	Response	May 22, 2006	May 22, 2006 PACER
21	Certificate of Service Other	May 25, 2006	May 25, 2006 PACER
22	Complaint	May 25, 2006	May 25, 2006 PACER
23	Reply Memorandum of Law	May 30, 2006	May 30, 2006 PACER
24	Certificate of Service Other	May 30, 2006	May 30, 2006 PACER
25	Notice of Appearance	June 1, 2006	June 1, 2006 PACER
26	Notice of Appearance	June 1, 2006	June 1, 2006 PACER
27	Notice of Appearance	June 1, 2006	June 1, 2006 PACER
28	Notice of Appearance	June 2, 2006	June 2, 2006 PACER
29	Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice	June 2, 2006	June 2, 2006 PACER
30	Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice	June 13, 2006	June 13, 2006 PACER
31	Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice	June 14, 2006	June 14, 2006 PACER
32	Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice	June 15, 2006	June 15, 2006 PACER
33	Certificate of Service Other	June 23, 2006	June 23, 2006 PACER
34	Amended Complaint 2 exhibits View on PACER	June 26, 2006	June 26, 2006 PACER
35	Motion to Dismiss 2 Certificate of Service View on PACER	June 26, 2006	June 26, 2006 PACER
36	Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion 2 Appendix A View on PACER 3 Certificate of Service View on PACER	June 26, 2006	June 26, 2006 PACER
37	Affidavit in Support of Motion 2 Exhibit A (Part 1) View on PACER 3 Exhibit A (Part 2) - Exhibit K (Part 1) View on PACER 4 Exhibit K (Part 2) - Exhibit L (Part 1) View on PACER 5 Exhibit L (Part 2) - Exhibit M (Part 1) View on PACER 6 Exhibit M (Part 2) - Exhibit O (Part 1) View on PACER 7 Exhibit O (Part 2) View on PACER 8 Certificate of Service View on PACER	June 26, 2006	June 26, 2006 PACER
38	Response in Opposition to Motion 2 Appendix Appendix of Unreported Authorities View on PACER	July 20, 2006	July 20, 2006 PACER
39	Declaration in Opposition to Motion 2 Exhibit 1-Zelinsky Article 2000 View on PACER 3 Exhibit 2-AARP Amicus Brief-Register v. PNC View on PACER 4 Exhibit 3-AARP Amicus Brief Cooper v. IBM View on PACER 5 Exhibit 4-Langbein excerpt View on PACER 6 Exhibit 5-Wall Street Journal Article 1998 View on PACER 7 Exhibit 6-Wall Street Journal Article 99 View on PACER 8 Exhibit 7-GOA Report View on PACER 9 Exhibit 8-H.R. Conf. Report View on PACER 10 Exhibit 9-Zelinsky article 2001 View on PACER	July 20, 2006	July 20, 2006 PACER
40	Scheduling Order	July 31, 2006	July 31, 2006 PACER
41	Pretrial Order	July 31, 2006	July 31, 2006 PACER
42	Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion	Aug. 3, 2006	Aug. 3, 2006 PACER
43	Endorsed Letter	Aug. 8, 2006	Aug. 8, 2006 PACER
44	Motion to Certify Class 2 Plaintiffs' Memorandum In Support Of Motion For Class Certification View on PACER 3 Affidavit of Peter S. Linden View on PACER 4 Exhibit A View on PACER 5 Exhibit B View on PACER 6 Exhibit C View on PACER 7 Exhibit D View on PACER 8 Exhibit E View on PACER 9 Exhibit F View on PACER 10 Certificate of Service View on PACER	Aug. 10, 2006	Aug. 10, 2006 PACER
45	Motion to Certify Class	Aug. 11, 2006	Aug. 11, 2006 PACER
46	Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion	Aug. 11, 2006	Aug. 11, 2006 PACER
47	Affidavit in Support of Motion 2 Exhibit A View on PACER 3 Exhibit B View on PACER 4 Exhibit C View on PACER 5 Exhibit D View on PACER 6 Exhibit E View on PACER 7 Exhibit F View on PACER	Aug. 11, 2006	Aug. 11, 2006 PACER
48	Certificate of Service Other	Aug. 11, 2006	Aug. 11, 2006 PACER
49	Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion 2 Certificate of Service View on PACER	Aug. 18, 2006	Aug. 18, 2006 PACER
50	Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion	Aug. 18, 2006	Aug. 18, 2006 PACER
51	Affidavit in Opposition to Motion 2 Exhibit 1 View on PACER 3 Exhibit 2 View on PACER 4 Exhibit 3 View on PACER 5 Exhibit 4 View on PACER 6 Exhibit 5 View on PACER 7 Exhibit 6 View on PACER	Aug. 18, 2006	Aug. 18, 2006 PACER
52	Certificate of Service Other	Aug. 18, 2006	Aug. 18, 2006 PACER
53	Notice (Other) 2 Exhibit 1 View on PACER	Sept. 7, 2006	Sept. 7, 2006 PACER
54	Transcript	Sept. 8, 2006	Sept. 8, 2006
55	Response in Support of Motion 2 Exhibit A View on PACER 3 Exhibit B View on PACER	Sept. 13, 2006	Sept. 13, 2006 PACER
56	Notice (Other)	Oct. 5, 2006	Oct. 5, 2006 PACER
57	Response in Support of Motion 2 Exhibit A View on PACER 3 Exhibit B View on PACER 4 Certificate of Service View on PACER	Oct. 11, 2006	Oct. 11, 2006 PACER
58	Response in Opposition to Motion	Oct. 16, 2006	Oct. 16, 2006 PACER
59	Notice (Other)	Oct. 19, 2006	Oct. 19, 2006 PACER
60	Affidavit in Opposition to Motion 2 Exhibits A-E View on PACER 3 Certificate of Service View on PACER	Oct. 20, 2006	Oct. 20, 2006 PACER
61	Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion 2 Appendices A-C View on PACER 3 Certificate of Service View on PACER	Oct. 20, 2006	Oct. 20, 2006 PACER
62	MEMORANDUM AND OPINION # 93876: that for the reasons set forth in this opinion, this motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part. the motion to dismiss is denied with respect to Count I, the age discrimination claim, and Counts IV-VI the notice claims, but Counts II and III are dismissed. The clerk of the court is instructed to close this motion and remove it from my docket. (Signed by Judge Harold Baer on 10/30/06) (dle, ) Modified on 10/31/2006 (rw, ).	Oct. 30, 2006	Oct. 30, 2006 RECAP
63	Motion for Certificate of Appealability 2 Exhibit Certificate of Service View on PACER	Nov. 1, 2006	Nov. 1, 2006 PACER
64	Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion 2 Exhibit A to Memorandum of Law View on PACER	Nov. 1, 2006	Nov. 1, 2006 PACER
65	Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion 2 Certificate of Service View on PACER	Nov. 10, 2006	Nov. 10, 2006 PACER
66	Endorsed Letter	Nov. 13, 2006	Nov. 13, 2006 PACER
67	Motion to Strike	Nov. 13, 2006	Nov. 13, 2006 PACER
68	Motion to Strike	Nov. 13, 2006	Nov. 13, 2006 PACER
69	Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion	Nov. 13, 2006	Nov. 13, 2006 PACER
70	Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion	Nov. 13, 2006	Nov. 13, 2006 PACER
71	Reply Affidavit in Support of Motion	Nov. 13, 2006	Nov. 13, 2006 PACER
72	Reply Memorandum of Law in Oppisition to Motion 2 Certificate of Service View on PACER	Nov. 17, 2006	Nov. 17, 2006 PACER
73	Protective Order	Nov. 20, 2006	Nov. 20, 2006 PACER
74	Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion 2 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order View on PACER	Nov. 20, 2006	Nov. 20, 2006 PACER
75	Endorsed Letter	Nov. 27, 2006	Nov. 27, 2006 PACER
76	Answer to Amended Complaint	Dec. 12, 2006	Dec. 12, 2006 PACER
77	Notice (Other) 2 Exhibit A View on PACER 3 Exhibit B View on PACER 4 Exhibit C View on PACER 5 Exhibit D - Part 1 View on PACER 6 Exhibit D - Part 2 of 2 View on PACER 7 Exhibit E - Part 1 of 2 View on PACER 8 Exhibit E - Part 2 of 2 View on PACER 9 Exhibit F View on PACER 10 Exhibit G View on PACER 11 Exhibit H View on PACER	Dec. 28, 2006	Dec. 28, 2006 PACER
78	Notice (Other) 2 Exhibit A View on PACER 3 TAB 1 View on PACER 4 TAB 2 View on PACER 5 TAB 3 View on PACER 6 TAB 4 View on PACER 7 TABS 5 AND 6 View on PACER	Dec. 29, 2006	Dec. 29, 2006 PACER
80	Transcript	Jan. 9, 2007	Jan. 9, 2007
81	Affidavit in Opposition to Motion	March 16, 2007	March 16, 2007
82	Affidavit in Opposition to Motion 2 Exhibit C- Part 2 View on PACER 3 Exhibit C- Part 3 View on PACER 4 Exhibit C- Part 4 View on PACER 5 Exhibit C- Part 5 View on PACER 6 Exhibit C- Part 6 View on PACER 7 Exhibit C- Part 7 View on PACER 8 Errata C- Part 8 View on PACER 9 Exhibit D- Part 1 View on PACER 10 Exhibit D- Part 2 View on PACER 11 Exhibit E-Part1 View on PACER 12 Exhibit E-Part 2 View on PACER 13 Exhibit E-Part 3 View on PACER 14 Exhibit E-Part 4 View on PACER	March 16, 2007	March 16, 2007 PACER
83	Affidavit in Opposition to Motion 2 Exhibit F- Part 2 View on PACER 3 Exhibit F- Part 3 View on PACER 4 Exhibit F- Part 4 View on PACER 5 Exhibit G- Par1 View on PACER 6 Exhibit G- Part 2 View on PACER 7 Exhibit G- Part 3 View on PACER 8 Exhibit G- Part 4 View on PACER 9 Exhibit H View on PACER 10 Exhibit I- Part 1 View on PACER 11 Exhibit I- Part 2 View on PACER 12 Exhibit I- Part 3 View on PACER 13 Exhibit I- Part 4 View on PACER 14 Exhibit I- Part 5 View on PACER 15 Exhibit I- Part 6 View on PACER	March 16, 2007	March 16, 2007 PACER
84	Affidavit in Opposition to Motion 2 Exhibit K View on PACER 3 Exhibit L- Part 1 View on PACER 4 Exhibit L- Part 2 View on PACER 5 Exhibit M- Part 1 View on PACER 6 Exhibit M- Part 2 View on PACER 7 Exhibit N View on PACER 8 Exhibit N View on PACER 9 Certificate of Service View on PACER	March 16, 2007	March 16, 2007 PACER
85	Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion	March 16, 2007	March 16, 2007
86	Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion 2 Appendix 1 View on PACER 3 Appendix 2 View on PACER 4 Text of Proposed Order View on PACER	March 16, 2007	March 16, 2007 PACER
87	Declaration in Support of Motion 2 Exhibit 1 View on PACER 3 Exhibit 2 View on PACER 4 Exhibit 3 View on PACER 5 Exhibit 4 View on PACER 6 Exhibit 5 View on PACER 7 Exhibit 6 View on PACER 8 Exhibit 7 View on PACER 9 Exhibit 8 View on PACER 10 Exhibit 9 View on PACER 11 Exhibit 10 View on PACER 12 Exhibit 11 View on PACER 13 Exhibit 12 View on PACER 14 Exhibit 13 View on PACER 15 Exhibit 14 View on PACER 16 Errata 15 View on PACER 17 Exhibit 16 View on PACER	March 16, 2007	March 16, 2007 PACER
88	Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge	March 23, 2007	March 23, 2007 PACER
89	Notice of Reassignment of Referral to Magistrate Judge	April 12, 2007	April 12, 2007 PACER
90	Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice	April 20, 2007	April 20, 2007 PACER
91	Order	April 24, 2007	April 24, 2007 PACER
92	Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice	April 30, 2007	April 30, 2007 PACER
93	Order	April 30, 2007	April 30, 2007 PACER
94	Notice (Other)	May 11, 2007	May 11, 2007 PACER
95	Notice (Other)	May 11, 2007	May 11, 2007 PACER
96	Notice (Other)	May 17, 2007	May 17, 2007
97	Order	May 21, 2007	May 21, 2007 PACER
98	MEMORANDUM AND OPINION # 94720: that certification is granted to the class with respect to the notice claims - i.e., Counts IV, V, and VI, but only with respect to the class claims that stem from the JPMC Plan as of 1/1/02 and excluding those individ uals who have already received their lump sum benefit; certification is granted to the class with respect to the age discrimination claim beginning 1/1/89, however, because Hirt v. The Equitable Ret. Plan for Employees Managers & Agents, no. 06cv4757 is currently sub judice before the Second Circuit and since that decision will likely be dispositive of the age discrimination issue, I am reserving the right to revisit this issue following that decision; plaintiffs Berotti, Falchetti, Melli, and S hapiro are appointed class representatives and the law firm Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, Kirby, McInerney & Squire, LLP and Keller Rohrback LLP are appointed class counsel and will abide my order of 7/28/06; discovery may proceed but it is restricted w ith respect to the age discrimination claim to the period 1/1/02 and thereafter; the parties will prepare a proposed joint pretrial scheduling order and bring it to a pretrial conference in chambers on 6/14/07 at 3:00 p.m.; the clerk of court is instructed to close this motion and remove it from my docket. (Signed by Judge Harold Baer on 5/30/07) (dle) Modified on 6/1/2007 (rw). Modified on 6/6/2007 (Lewis, Diahan). Modified on 6/6/2007 (Lewis, Diahan).	May 30, 2007	May 30, 2007 RECAP
100	Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion 2 Exhibit A View on PACER 3 Exhibit B View on PACER 4 Exhibit C View on PACER	June 14, 2007	June 14, 2007 PACER
99	Motion for Reconsideration	June 14, 2007	June 14, 2007 PACER
101	Scheduling Order	June 15, 2007	June 15, 2007

show / hide docket entries

Case Details

State / Territory:

New York

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Private Employment Class Actions

Key Dates

Filing Date: Jan. 31, 2006

Closing Date: July 15, 2010

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

all plan participants, whether active, inactive or retired, their beneficiaries and Estates, whose accrued benefits or pension benefits are based in whole or in part on the Plan's cash balance formulas, from January 1, 2002 to present.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

J.P. Morgan Chase Retirement Plan, Private Entity/Person

J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., Private Entity/Person

John Does, Private Entity/Person

JPMC's Director of Human Resources, Private Entity/Person

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (New York City), Private Entity/Person