Lynne Wang v. Chinese Daily News, Inc.
709 F.3d 829
9th Cir.2013Background
- Plaintiffs filed a class action against Chinese Daily News, Inc. (CDN) alleging FLSA, California UCL, and California Labor Code violations.
- District court certified the FLSA claim as a collective action and the state-law claims as a class under Rule 23(b)(2).
- After a 16-day jury trial and a 3-day bench trial, judgment favored plaintiffs.
- We affirmed, then the Supreme Court vacated and remanded to reconsider in light of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes.
- We reverse certification under Rule 23(b)(2) and remand to reconsider under Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(3).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 23(a) commonality is satisfied | Wang argues numerous common questions due to CDN’s alleged pattern. | CDN argues commonality is lacking after Wal‑Mart | Vacate commonality finding; remand for reevaluation. |
| Whether Rule 23(b)(2) certification is proper | Monetary claims cannot be maintained under 23(b)(2) per Wal‑Mart. | 23(b)(2) may still cover certain claims; injunctive relief available. | Reverse certification under 23(b)(2). |
| Whether certification under Rule 23(b)(3) is appropriate | Predominance supported by uniform exemption policy; class should proceed. | Predominance is lacking due to individual issues. | Remand to reconsider under 23(b)(3) in light of Wal‑Mart, Wells Fargo, Vinole, Brinker. |
| Damages framework under Wal‑Mart | Class-wide damages appropriate if individualized determinations are possible. | Damages must be individualized; avoid trial-by-formula. | If re-certified, use individualized damages determinations as required by Wal‑Mart. |
| Standing to pursue injunctive relief on behalf of the class | No named plaintiffs appearing to have standing for injunctive relief. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011) (remand and reconsideration after Wal‑Mart decision)
- Ellis v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 657 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 2011) (commonality requires common questions with potential classwide resolution)
- In re Wells Fargo Home Mortgage Overtime Pay Litig., 571 F.3d 953 (9th Cir. 2009) (predominance inquiry; avoid presumptions from uniform exemptions)
- Vinole v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 571 F.3d 935 (9th Cir. 2009) (limitations on relying on internal exemption policies for predominance)
- Brinker Rest. Corp. v. Superior Court, 273 P.3d 513 (Cal. 2012) (California meal-break duties clarified; Brinker standard)