Naval architects and marine engineers who worked for U.S. shipbuilders and Navy contractors between 2000 and 2025 are covered by $8.175 million in no-poach settlements that a federal court preliminarily approved in September 2026. There is no claim form yet; the court has not approved a notice plan.
Settlement Pending Final Approval · No Admission of Wrongdoing
The court has preliminarily approved these settlements, but it has not decided whether any defendant broke the law. The settling companies resolved the claims against them without a finding of liability, and the plaintiffs' allegations described below have not been proven. There is no claim process yet. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Is This About?
Seven shipbuilders and defense contractors have agreed to pay a combined $8,175,000 to settle a class action alleging that companies building and servicing U.S. Navy ships agreed not to recruit each other's naval architects and marine engineers, holding down their pay. On September 17, 2026, U.S. District Judge Anthony J. Trenga of the Eastern District of Virginia granted preliminary approval of the settlements and certified a settlement class.The case is Scharpf v. General Dynamics Corp., No. 1:23-cv-01372, filed in October 2023. Preliminary approval is not final approval: the court still has to approve a plan for notifying class members, hold a fairness hearing and decide whether to grant final approval. No claim form or deadline exists yet.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
Who Is Paying, and How Much
According to a declaration filed by class counsel in June 2026, the settlements break down as follows:- Huntington Ingalls Industries: $2,750,000, with 25% due after preliminary approval and the rest after final approval
- Gibbs & Cox: $2,500,000
- Marinette Marine: $1,075,000
- Serco: $925,000
- CACI International: $750,000
- Thor Solutions: $100,000
- Bollinger Shipyards: $75,000
Each settling company also agreed to cooperate with the plaintiffs by producing documents, making current or former employees available for depositions, helping authenticate documents and answering questions about payroll data. The settling defendants resolved the claims without admitting wrongdoing.
What the Lawsuit Alleges
The plaintiffs allege that major Navy shipbuilders and engineering contractors agreed among themselves not to solicit or hire each other's naval architects and marine engineers. They say those agreements reduced competition for a small, specialized workforce and kept salaries lower than they would otherwise have been. The defendants have denied the allegations, and no court has found that any company took part in such an agreement.The case has had a long path. It was dismissed early on, revived by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and then moved into discovery, where the parties exchanged hundreds of thousands of pages of documents and took depositions. The seven settlement agreements were signed between January and June 2026.
Who Is in the Settlement Class
The court certified this class for settlement purposes:All naval architects and marine engineers, employed by Defendants in the United States (excluding Defendant Faststream Recruitment Ltd.) their predecessors, subsidiaries, and/or related entities in the United States at any time from January 1, 2000, until December 31, 2025.
The defendants' executives, human resources managers and human resources staff are excluded, along with the defendants themselves and government entities. The notice, once approved, should explain exactly who can share in the money.
General Dynamics Was Dismissed Without Paying
General Dynamics was the lead named defendant, but it is not part of these settlements. In May 2026, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their claims against General Dynamics, Bath Iron Works, Electric Boat and General Dynamics Information Technology with prejudice, meaning the claims cannot be refiled. They also dismissed Tridentis and The Columbia Group. General Dynamics then asked the court to order the plaintiffs' attorneys to pay part of its legal fees under a federal statute that allows sanctions against lawyers who unreasonably multiply proceedings. The court denied that request on August 5, 2026.What Happens Next
The preliminary approval order directs class counsel to file a motion for approval of a notice plan before asking for final approval. In their filings, class counsel said they would first obtain class members' contact information from the defendants and select a claims administrator. Once the court approves the notice plan, class members should receive notice describing how the money will be divided, any claim steps, the deadlines to object or opt out, and the date of the final approval hearing.The court appointed Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro and Handley Farah & Anderson as settlement class counsel. OCA will update this page when notice begins.
Questions
Do I need to do anything right now to get money from the naval engineer settlement?
Not yet. The court has granted preliminary approval but has not approved a notice plan or a claim process. Class counsel told the court they would select a claims administrator and propose notices after the defendants produce contact information for class members. Class members should receive notice explaining any steps once that plan is approved.
Who counts as a class member?
The settlement class is defined as all naval architects and marine engineers employed in the United States by the defendants, or their predecessors, subsidiaries or related entities, at any time from January 1, 2000 through December 31, 2025. The defendants' executives and human resources managers and staff are excluded, as is employment with the recruiting firm Faststream Recruitment.
How much will each engineer receive?
No per-person amount has been set. The $8.175 million total will be reduced by any attorneys' fees, expenses and administration costs the court approves, and the rest will be divided under an allocation plan that has not yet been filed. Any figure for an individual payment would be a guess until that plan is approved.
Did General Dynamics settle?
No. The plaintiffs dismissed their claims against General Dynamics and three of its units, Bath Iron Works, Electric Boat and General Dynamics Information Technology, with prejudice in May 2026 without a settlement payment. The court later denied General Dynamics' request to make the plaintiffs' lawyers pay part of its legal costs.
Sources
- Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Settlements, Scharpf v. General Dynamics Corp., No. 1:23-cv-01372 (E.D. Va. Sept. 17, 2026), ECF No. 599 — order (PDF) via CourtListener.
- Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlements (June 11, 2026), ECF No. 565 — motion (PDF); Declaration of Brent W. Johnson, ECF No. 565-1 — declaration (PDF).
- Orders dismissing the General Dynamics defendants (May 13, 2026), Tridentis and The Columbia Group (May 29, 2026), and denying General Dynamics' fee motion (Aug. 5, 2026), ECF Nos. 560, 563, 564, 597 — docket via CourtListener.
