Class Actions Team


In a closely watched case by companies that operate in the UK—and one that had the potential to dramatically expand the UK’s representative action regime—the UK Supreme Court instead dismissed a representative privacy action against Google brought on behalf of 4 million iPhone users. The Court held that the claimant could not show that he

To circumvent predominance issues, plaintiffs sometimes will ask a court to certify an issue class under Rule 23(c)(4). The Third Circuit recently made it more difficult for plaintiffs to do so by making clear that the issue underlying such a request for class certification must independently satisfy one of the requirements of Rule 23(b). See

Under American Pipe and Construction Company v. Utah, the filing of a class complaint tolls the limitations period governing the individual claims of putative class members. 414 U.S. 538 (1974). How such tolling applies on a case-by-case basis can present difficult questions.

One such question is whether American Pipe tolling applies to individual claims

The Second Circuit recently reaffirmed the potential benefits of front-loading merits arguments as a strategy to defeat class actions. Kaye v. Merck & Co., 852 F. App’x 569 (2d Cir. 2021), affirmed a district court’s order granting summary judgment for the defendant in an action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act where the fax

The Ninth Circuit recently held that personal jurisdiction defenses as to absent class members should be raised at the class-certification stage. Moser v. Benefytt, Inc., 8 F.4th 872 (9th Cir. 2021), vacated a district court order that certified two nationwide classes despite the defendant’s objection that the district court lacked personal jurisdiction as to

Two federal appellate courts are set to address the circumstances under which a class that includes many uninjured class members may be certified. In the Ninth Circuit, the en banc court agreed to decide if a class that includes more than a de minimis number of uninjured class members can satisfy the predominance requirement of

A company facing a putative class action from a plaintiff who has opted out of an arbitration agreement may still file an early motion to defeat class certification if the company can prove that most of the class has agreed to arbitration. In Lawson v. Grubhub, Inc., 2021 WL 4258826 (9th Cir. 2021), the

Arbitration agreements often delegate to the arbitrator threshold questions of arbitrability, including whether the agreement itself is valid and enforceable. The Second, Third, and Fourth Circuits have invalidated entire arbitration agreements as prospective waivers—unenforceable waivers of a party’s right to pursue federal statutory remedies—without separately analyzing or enforcing the delegation clauses in those agreements.


California’s McGill rule is often invoked by plaintiffs to invalidate arbitration agreements that purport to waive the right to seek public injunctive relief in any forum. But the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Hodges v. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, 2021 WL 4127711 (9th Cir. 2021), limits the impact of the McGill rule by narrowly defining

In Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta, 2021 WL 4187860 (9th Cir. 2021), the Ninth Circuit held, in a 2-1 decision, that the Federal Arbitration Act does not preempt a California Labor Code provision prohibiting employers from requiring any applicant or employee “to waive any right, forum, or procedure” for certain claims. According to the