![]() 128-29.) After careful review of the parties’ 5 briefs, supplemental briefs, the record, and the applicable law, the Court DENIES 6 Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. 125.) Plaintiffs 3 filed a supplemental brief on October 13, 2017, and Defendants filed their supplemental 4 brief on October 20, 2017. 122.) After the hearing, the Court 2 directed supplemental briefing on the issue of claim splitting. 121.) A 26 27 1 28 Finding good cause, the Court granted Defendants’ ex parte request to file a sur-reply. ![]() 100, 102.) With 25 Court approval, Defendants filed a sur-reply on September 15, 2017.1 (Dkt. 75.) 24 Defendants filed an opposition, and Plaintiffs filed a reply. ![]() ![]() 21 22 23 Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. 18 ALERE, INC., a Delaware corporation, ALERE HOME MONITORING, INC., a Delaware corporation, ALERE SAN DIEGO, INC., a Delaware corporation, 19 20 Defendant. ![]() 140 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 DINA ANDREN, SIDNEY BLUDMAN, VIRGINIA CIOFFI, BERNARD FALK, JEANETTE KERZNER-GREEN, CAROL MONTALBANO, and DONALD RIGOT, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, Case No.: 16cv1255-GPC(AGS) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION Plaintiff, 16 17 v. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |