Case No. 5:20-cv-5905-PCP
The Plaintiffs claim that between 2007 and 2020, PFI and PISF ran a fraudulent scheme that used new investors’ money to pay existing investors, cover shortfalls in unrelated bank accounts, and personally enrich the companies’ principals.
The Plaintiffs allege that Umpqua Bank knew of the fraudulent scheme, yet continued to provide banking services to PFI and PISF.
Umpqua Bank denies that it did anything wrong and says that it did not know about any wrongdoing by PFI and PISF.
Back To TopIn a class action lawsuit, one or more people called “Class Representatives” sue on behalf of themselves and other people who have similar claims. The people together are a “Class” or “Class Members.” The people who sued—and all the Class Members like them—are called the Plaintiffs. The company they sued (in this case, Umpqua Bank) is called the Defendant. One court resolves the issues for everyone in the Class—except for those people who choose to exclude themselves from the Class.
Back To TopThe Court did not decide in favor of Plaintiffs or Umpqua Bank. The Court held a jury trial in this case in February 2025, which did not result in a win for either side because the jury could not reach a verdict. After that, the Court scheduled a second trial that would be in front of a new jury.
Instead of moving forward with the second trial, Plaintiffs and Umpqua agreed to a settlement. That way, the parties avoid the risk, cost, and delay of further litigation including appeals. Class Counsel believes the settlement is in the best interest of the Class given the risks of the case.
Back To TopAll current Class Members are part of the settlement. The Court decided that PFI and PISF investors are Class Members if:
Excluded from the Class are commercial lenders to PFI and PISF, and individuals who previously asked to be excluded from the Class in 2023.
Back To TopThe settlement provides for Umpqua to pay $55,000,000. Of that, approximately $38,000,000 will be distributed to Class Members. The rest will be used to pay attorney’s fees, costs, and administration expenses as described in Section 11 below, as well as any service payments that the Court decides to award to the Class Representatives.
Back To TopYes. The Court appointed lawyers at Gibbs Mura LLP (formerly known as Gibbs Law Group LLP) and Silver Law Group to represent the Class Members. Together, these lawyers are called “Class Counsel.” You do not need to hire your own lawyers because Class Counsel is working on your behalf. You will not be charged for these lawyers. If you want to be represented by your own lawyer, you may hire one at your own expense.
Back To TopThe Court approved a payment of $13,750,000 (25% of the settlement amount) for attorney's fees, $20,000 in service awards to class representatives, and reimbursement of up to $1,317,966.05 in litigation expenses that Class Counsel incurred throughout this case. These fees and costs will come out of the $55,000,000 that Umpqua Bank has agreed to pay in settlement.
Back To TopThe Court held a Fairness Hearing at the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, 280 South First Street, San Jose, CA 95113 in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor on September 11, 2025. After considering whether the settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate, the Court granted approval of the settlement.
Back To TopReview the Important Documents page to find important documents in the case. You may also speak to Class Counsel by calling, emailing, or writing the following attorneys:
Amy M. Zeman
1-510-350-9721
amz@classlawgroup.com
Linda P. Lam
1-510-350-9722
lpl@classlawgroup.com
Wynne Tidwell
1-510-350-9707
ewt@classlawgroup.com
GIBBS MURA LLP
1111 Broadway, Suite 2100
Oakland, California 94607
Please do not contact Umpqua Bank or the Court about the notice or the lawsuit. Neither Umpqua Bank nor the Court will respond to any questions regarding the notice or the lawsuit.
Back To Top