Over the past several years, circuit courts have started to provide more specific guidance on the countours of the "rigorous" analysis required by district courts in deciding whether to certify a class. The Second Circuit's decision in In re Initial Public Offerings Securities Litig., 471 F.3d 24 (2d Cir. 2006) and the Third Circuit's decision in In re Hydrogen Peroxide Antitrust Litig., 552 F.3d 305 (3d Cir. 2008) are probably the most cited cases in this area, although most circuit courts have not specifically addressed this issue.
A few months ago, the Sixth Circuit finally decided to address the issue head on when it granted a Rule 23(f) interlocutory appeal "to clarify the scope and extent of the district court's obligation to resolve disputed factual issues in undertaking a rigorous analysis of the claims asserted as they relate to the class certification requirements" and to address "the question of the standard of proof a potential class representative must meet in demonstrating that the fraud on the market presumption is applicable to the claims asserted." In re Abercombie & Fitch Co., et al., Case No. 09-0310 (Aug. 24, 2009 Order).
The Abercrombie case will set the standard within the Circuit and will be closely watched.
- Partner
Joe Callow helps clients manage and reduce litigation risk and litigation costs. When litigation arises, he handles and coordinates cases on a national, regional, and local basis.
Joe primarily works on class action and complex ...
Blog Contact: Joseph Callow, Litigation Partner
jcallow@kmklaw.com or 513.579.6419
Topics/Tags
Select- Class Action Litigation
- Coronavirus
- Litigation
- Cybersecurity and Privacy Law
- Data Breach
- Securities Law
- Supreme Court
- E-Discovery
- Intellectual Property
- Social Media
- Trademark
- Trademark Litigation
- Sixth Circuit
- Initial Coin Offering
- Antitrust
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
- Bet-the-Company Litigation
- E-Discovery Case Law
- Electronic Data Discovery
- Employment Law
- Workplace Accommodations
- ESI
- Employer Policies
- GDPR
- General Data Protection Regulation
- Labor & Employment Law
- Labor Law
- Technology
- Cryptocurrency
- SEC
- Securities Litigation
- ERISA
- Stock Drop
- Ascertainability
- Cybersecurity Regulation
- Drug Enforcement Agency
- Medical Marijuana
- Ohio Foreclosure Reform
- Craft Brewing
- Copyright Law
- Environmental Law
- Fair Housing Act
- Health Care Act
- Healthcare Reform
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- Religion Discrimination
- Seventh Circuit
- Electronically Stored Information
- Proportionality
- Accommodation
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- EEOC
- FLSA
- Telecommuting
- Cyber Insurance
- Lenders
- Receivership Statute
- Business Process Improvement
- Employment Litigation
- Employer Handbook
- Employer Rules
- National Labor Relations Act
- National Labor Relations Board
- NLRB
- Unions
- E-Discovery Project Plan
- Predictive Coding
- TAR ( Technology Assisted Review)
- Evidence
- Quality Representation
- Subpoena
- Arbitration
- CAFA
- Land Use & Zoning
- Privacy
- Statute of Limitations
- Construction Litigation
- Taxation
- Federal Rule
Recent Posts
- Questioning the Questionnaires: New PPP-Related Litigation Raises Issues for Borrowers
- "You Don't Have to Go Home But You Can't Stay Here": Updates to Ohio and Kentucky’s COVID-19 Orders Impacting Bars & Restaurants
- Kentucky Restaurants Begin Opening with Limited Capacity Amid COVID-19 Epidemic
- Ohio Restaurants and Bars Begin Soft Openings for Diners Amid COVID-19 Epidemic
- Supreme Court Sidesteps “Cy Pres” Challenge
- Golfers, New and Old - Be Careful!
- "Aloha Poke": Social Media and Consumer Perception are Part of the Trademark Enforcement Equation
- GDPR: Less Than 100 Day and Counting to "G-Day" - Here's What You Need to Know
- Rapid SEC Action Against AriseBank Reveals New Playbook For Allegedly Fraudulent ICOs
- Giga Watt ICO Faces Tezos-like Securities Litigation Challenge