We previously reported that the Tenth Circuit enforced a lower court’s order requiring a class objector to post a sizeable bond to appeal.  In In re Magsafe Apple Power Adapter Litigation, Nos. 12-15757, 12-15782 (9th Cir. Apr. 24, 2014), the Ninth Circuit, in an unpublished opinion, reached the opposite conclusion.  The district court required each objector to post a $200,000 bond to secure expenses and attorneys’ fees on appeal.  The Ninth Circuit found this to be an abuse of discretion.  The fee shifting statute applicable in the case did not permit assessing plaintiffs’ fees against objectors.  As a result, a bond to secure fees was inappropriate.  As to the fee award the objectors challenged, following In re Bluetooth Headset Products Liability Litigation, 654 F.3d 935 (9th Cir. 2011), the Ninth Circuit found the district court had failed to explain why the lodestar amount was reasonable or why a multiplier was appropriate, it did not cross check its lodestar fee against the percentage recovery method, and it failed to address the indicia of self-dealing or collusion as identified in Bluetooth.  Thus, the court remanded the case for consideration of the fee issues.