High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
U
NITED
S
TEEL
, P
APER
& F
ORESTRY
,R
UBBER
, M
ANUFACTURING
E
NERGY
,A
LLIED
I
NDUSTRIAL
& S
ERVICE
W
ORKERS
I
NTERNATIONAL
U
NION
,AFL-CIO, CLC, On behalf of itsmembers employed by defendants;R
AUDEL
C
OVARRUBIAS
, individuallyand on behalf of all similarlysituated current and formerNo. 09-56578employees; D
AVID
S
IMMONS
,D.C. No.
individually and on behalf of all2:08-cv-02068-PSG-similarly situated current andFFMformer employees; S
TEPHEN
S.S
WADER
Sr., individually and onbehalf of all similarly situatedcurrent and former employees,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.C
ONOCO
P
HILLIPS
C
OMPANY
,
Defendant-Appellee.
377
U
NITED
S
TEEL
, P
APER
& F
ORESTRY
,R
UBBER
, M
ANUFACTURING
E
NERGY
,A
LLIED
I
NDUSTRIAL &
S
ERVICE
W
ORKERS
I
NTERNATIONAL
U
NION
,AFL-CIO, CLC, On behalf of itsmembers employed by defendants;R
AUDEL
C
OVARRUBIAS
, individuallyand on behalf of all similarlyNo. 09-56579situated current and formerD.C. No.employees; D
AVID
S
IMMONS
,2:08-cv-02068-PSG-
individually and on behalf of allFFMsimilarly situated current andformer employees; S
TEPHEN
S.OPINIONS
WADER
Sr., individually and onbehalf of all similarly situatedcurrent and former employees,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.C
ONOCO
P
HILLIPS
C
OMPANY
,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Courtfor the Central District of CaliforniaPhilip S. Gutierrez, District Judge, PresidingArgued and SubmittedNovember 4, 2009—Pasadena, CaliforniaFiled January 6, 2010Before: Thomas G. Nelson, Jay S. Bybee, andMilan D. Smith, Jr., Circuit Judges.Opinion by Judge Bybee
378U
NITED
S
TEEL
v. C
ONOCO
P
HILLIPS
COUNSELAnne Richardson, Hadsell, Stormer, Keeny, Richardson &Renick, LLP, Pasadena, California, for plaintiffs-appellants-appellees Raudel Covarrubias, David Simmons, and StephenS. Swader, Sr.Robert A. Cantore, Gilbert & Sackman, Inc., Los Angeles,California, for plaintiff-appellant-appellee United Steel, Paper& Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial& Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC.Rex S. Heinke, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, LLP, LosAngeles, California, for defendant-appellant-appellee Cono-coPhillips Co.
OPINION
BYBEE, Circuit Judge:These consolidated appeals raise two issues: first, whetherthe district court abused its discretion when it denied plain-tiffs’ motion to certify a putative class out of concern thatpractical obstacles could potentially develop if plaintiffs’legal theory were ultimately rejected; and second, whether thedistrict court erred in remanding, in light of its certificationdecision, state law claims to state court for lack of subjectmatter jurisdiction. We hold that the district court abused itsdiscretion when it assumed, for the purpose of Federal Ruleof Civil Procedure 23 certification analysis and without anyseparate inquiry into the merits, that plaintiffs’ legal theorywould fail. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for reconsid-eration of plaintiffs’ certification motion and dismiss as mootthe appeal of the remand order.
381U
NITED
S
TEEL
v. C
ONOCO
P
HILLIPS
Add a Comment