Costco 2014 Annual Report Download - page 68

et al. v. Amoco Oil Company, et al., Case No. 07-cv-00661 (D. Utah); and Mark Wyatt, et al., v. B. P.
America Corp., et al., Case No. 07-1754 (S.D. Cal.). On June 18, 2007, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation assigned the action, entitled In re Motor Fuel Temperature Sales Practices Litigation, MDL
Docket No 1840, to Judge Kathryn Vratil in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. On
April 12, 2009, the Company agreed to settle the actions in which it is named as a defendant. Under the
settlement, which was subject to final approval by the court, the Company agreed, to the extent allowed
by law and subject to other terms and conditions in the agreement, to install over five years from the
effective date of the settlement temperature-correcting dispensers in the States of Alabama, Arizona,
California, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee,
Texas, Utah, and Virginia. Other than payments to class representatives, the settlement does not provide
for cash payments to class members. On September 22, 2011, the court preliminarily approved a revised
settlement, which did not materially alter the terms. On April 24, 2012, the court granted final approval of
the revised settlement. A class member who objected has filed a notice of appeal from the order
approving the settlement. Plaintiffs have moved for an award of $10 million in attorneys’ fees, as well as
an award of costs and payments to class representatives. The Company has opposed the motion. On
March 20, 2014, the Company filed a notice invoking a “most favored nation” provision under the
settlement, under which it seeks to adopt provisions in later settlements with certain other defendants, an
invocation that class counsel has opposed.
On October 4, 2006, the Company received a grand jury subpoena from the United States Attorney’s
Office for the Central District of California, seeking records relating to the Company’s receipt and handling
of hazardous merchandise returned by Costco members and other records. The Company has entered
into a tolling agreement with the United States Attorney’s Office.
The Environmental Protection Agency issued an Information Request to the Company, dated
November 1, 2007, regarding warehouses in the states of Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada and
relating to compliance with regulations concerning air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment. On
September 3, 2014, the EPA and the Department of Justice announced a settlement with the Company
under which, among other things, the Company agreed to pay an immaterial sum and to implement steps
to reduce the use and releases of ozone-depleting gas in certain of its refrigeration systems. The
settlement is subject to federal court approval.
The Company has received notices from most states stating that they have appointed an agent to
conduct an examination of the books and records of the Company to determine whether it has complied
with state unclaimed property laws. In addition to seeking the turnover of unclaimed property subject to
escheat laws, the states may seek interest, penalties, costs of examinations, and other relief.
The Company has received from the Drug Enforcement Administration subpoenas and administrative
inspection warrants concerning the Company's fulfillment of prescriptions related to controlled substances
and related practices. The Company is seeking to cooperate with these processes.
The Company does not believe that any pending claim, proceeding or litigation, either alone or in the
aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position; however, it is possible
that an unfavorable outcome of some or all of the matters, however unlikely, could result in a charge that
might be material to the results of an individual fiscal quarter.
66