People helping people. Open class action settlements in one place, in plain English. Free, no sign-up, no catch. Email alerts are free too: open any settlement and press Notify me.

Data updated 51 minutes ago . Always confirm on the official settlement website.

← Back to settlements

The claim deadline for this settlement passed on Sep 21, 2026. It can't be filed any more.

Erisa

Ricoh USA Retirement Savings Plan ERISA Class Action Settlement ($1.75M)

Paid automatically $1.75M

Ricoh USA agreed to a $1.75M ERISA settlement over 401(k) recordkeeping fees, the Stable Value Fund and forfeitures. No claim form and no way to opt out.

Who qualifies and how to claim

ERISA Retirement Plan · Final Approval Granted — Automatic Payment

Current Status

There is no claim form and no claim deadline. If you were a participant, your share is calculated from the plan's own records and paid to you automatically. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted final approval on October 8, 2026, in a Final Approval Order and Judgment entered the same day, along with a separate order on attorneys' fees, expenses and case contribution awards. No payment date has been announced; under the settlement, distribution follows the order becoming Final and the insurer funding the balance of the settlement. Two features made this settlement unusual: the class was certified as a non-opt-out class, so no one could exclude themselves, and the only action available to a class member was a written objection filed by September 21, 2026.

What Changed Recently?

On October 8, 2026, the court entered a Final Approval Order and Judgment approving the settlement as fair, reasonable and adequate and finally approving the Plan of Allocation. In a separate order the same day, it awarded class counsel $583,333.33 in attorneys' fees and $24,476.32 in expenses, both paid from the gross settlement amount, and awarded each named plaintiff a $5,000 case contribution award. The official settlement website now states that the court granted final approval on October 8, 2026. No distribution date has been announced.

The parties reached this settlement on November 5, 2025 and executed the agreement on February 5, 2026. The court has since granted preliminary approval and preliminarily certified the settlement class, which is what put postcard notice in the mail, posted the long-form notice, and set the September 21 and October 8 dates. Analytics LLC is administering the settlement.

The litigation is actually two cases. The first was filed in 2022 and reached its operative complaint on December 27, 2022; a second suit was filed on August 13, 2025. Both assert ERISA claims about how the Ricoh USA, Inc. Retirement Savings Plan was managed, operated and administered, and the parties moved to consolidate them for settlement purposes. Class counsel reviewed plan governing documents, participant communications and U.S. Department of Labor filings, and the parties went through document discovery before turning to mediation.

The defendants — Ricoh USA, Inc., its Board of Directors, and the Ricoh Retirement Plans Committee — deny every claim and deny any liability or wrongful conduct of any kind. They say they administered the plan properly, prudently and in the best interests of participants, and they would have argued that even if a duty had been breached, the plan and its participants suffered no loss. No court has found them liable. The agreement is explicit that it is not an admission of wrongdoing or of fiduciary status.

What Are the Allegations?

The notice describes three alleged breaches of the ERISA duties of care and prudence.

  • Recordkeeping fees. The named plaintiffs allege the defendants failed to prudently monitor and control the recordkeeping fees charged to participants. Recordkeeping is the administrative back office of a retirement plan — the account statements, the transaction processing, the participant website.
  • The Ricoh Stable Value Fund. They allege that offering this fund as an investment option was unreasonable and imprudent. The defendants respond that they had a thorough monitoring process that more than satisfied their duties.
  • Forfeitures. They allege the defendants used forfeited employer contributions — money left behind by participants who left before vesting — to offset the company's other employer contributions rather than to pay plan expenses. Where that money goes is the difference between the employer saving money and participants saving money.

Where this information comes from