In In re Outpatient Medical Center Employee Antitrust Litigation, 2026 WL 1678954,the Northern District of Illinois recently refused to certify a proposed class of healthcare employees who alleged that their employers entered into a “no-poach agreement” that prohibited them from
Inside Class Actions
The latest developments and trends affecting class actions
Inside Class Actions, published by Covington & Burling LLP, focuses on developments and legal issues in class action litigation. The blog covers topics such as multidistrict litigation (MDL) procedures, class certification challenges, predominance and ascertainability standards, consumer protection class actions, antitrust class actions, and state and federal regulatory impacts on class litigation. It discusses recent court decisions affecting class action strategies, including evidentiary and procedural requirements, damages modeling, and preemption issues under federal statutes. The blog provides insights relevant to litigators, corporate counsel, and policymakers involved in complex class action and mass tort cases.
Latest from Inside Class Actions - Page 3
Fourth Circuit Vacates Grant of Class Certification for Lack of Commonality and Predominance
By Daniel Esses
The Fourth Circuit recently vacated a district court’s grant of class certification based on a lack of commonality and predominance. See Overby v. Anheuser-Busch, LLC, 2026 WL 1718962 (4th Cir. June 15, 2026). The plaintiffs sought to represent a class…
Federal Court Allows Plaintiff to Cure Standing Defect Through Early Amendment
A district court in the Northern District of California recently denied Lyft’s motion to dismiss a putative class action on Rule 12(b)(1) grounds after the plaintiff voluntarily amended her complaint under Rule 15 to cure standing issues raised by Lyft.…
Third Circuit Vacates Class Counsel Fee As Excessive—Again
“Class action counsel serve a valuable role in our legal system and deserve to be paid. But not twice.” Gelis v. BMW of N. Am., LLC, No. 24-2721, 2026 WL 1691583, at *1 (3d Cir. June 11, 2026) (“Gelis II”). …
Washington Anti-Spam Law Decision Addresses Article III Standing in CEMA Cases
By Jehan Patterson & Irene Kim
A federal court recently addressed whether plaintiffs alleging misleading commercial email practices in violation of Washington’s Commercial Electronic Mail Act (“CEMA”) have Article III standing to pursue claims. The ruling suggests that alleged violations of CEMA, standing alone, could constitute…
Standing Found, But Negligence Fails: Eastern District of Michigan Dismisses Data Breach Claims for Lack of Causation
By Sam Greeley
In a consolidated putative class action arising out of an alleged data breach, In re A-Line Staffing Solutions Data Security Incident Litigation, Case No. 24-cv-11917 (E.D. Mich. May 27, 2026), a Michigan district court declined to dismiss the complaint under…
Ninth Circuit Reverses Dismissal of False Advertising Suit Based on Malic Acid
By Stephen Rees
We previously covered the Southern District of California’s dismissal of a plaintiff’s claim that defendant falsely advertised that its licorice candy was “naturally flavored” because testing allegedly showed that the product contained synthetic malic acid that functioned as a flavor. …
Third Circuit Addresses Standing in Website Wiretapping Claims—Again
The Third Circuit continues to draw a firm line on Article III standing in website “wiretapping” cases. Just weeks after the court’s decision in Harriet Carter Gifts, the court has issued yet another decision reinforcing that the alleged collection…
Tenth Circuit Emphasizes Prior Holding that Ascertainability Does Not Require Administrative Feasibility
By Stephen Rees
As we previously covered, the Tenth Circuit in Cline v. Sunoco, Inc. (R&M), 159 F.4th 11711 (10th Cir. 2025) adopted the majority view that “administrative feasibility” for identifying class members is not an independent requirement for certifying a class…
Eighth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Antitrust Class Action Alleging Group Boycott of Agricultural E-Commerce Platforms for “Impermissible Group Pleading”
In In re: Crop Inputs Antitrust Litigation, No. 24-3104, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the dismissal with prejudice of an antitrust class action alleging that suppliers of seeds, pesticides, and other agricultural inputs conspired to refuse to sell their products to…