We defend companies against class action litigation including consumer, securities, employment, and privacy class actions, focusing on defeating certification.
Class actions aggregate claims into high-stakes litigation that threatens enterprise value. MC Law's Class Actions practice defends companies against class claims.
Certification often determines case outcome. We develop rigorous challenges to class certification, attacking commonality, typicality, adequacy, and predominance.
Plaintiffs must satisfy Rule 23(a) requirements of numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation, plus fit within a Rule 23(b) category—most commonly predominance and superiority for damages classes or injunctive relief classes.
Defense strategies include demonstrating individual issues predominate over common ones, challenging the typicality or adequacy of the class representative, showing the class is not ascertainable, attacking the methodology of plaintiffs' common proof, and presenting evidence of individual damages variations.
Class certification dramatically increases settlement value by aggregating claims and creating existential litigation risk. Even cases with relatively small individual damages become extremely valuable as class actions, which is why certification is often the decisive battleground.
Defenses include challenging class certification, removing to federal court under CAFA, asserting individual arbitration agreements, pursuing early dispositive motions, and defending on the merits. Strategic use of these tools can narrow or eliminate class exposure.
The Class Action Fairness Act provides federal jurisdiction over class actions with minimal diversity and aggregate claims exceeding $5 million. CAFA expanded federal court access for defendants, providing a generally more favorable forum for class action defense.
Order attorney-drafted documents related to this practice.
A set of document requests served by the defendant in a copyright litigation case involving a similar work, asking the plaintiff to provide specific documents relevant to the case.
A set of interrogatories served by the defendant in a copyright litigation case involving a similar work, requiring the plaintiff to respond to written questions under oath.
A set of document requests served by the plaintiff in a copyright litigation case involving a similar work, asking the defendant to provide specific documents relevant to the case.
A set of interrogatories served by the plaintiff in a copyright litigation case involving a similar work, requiring the defendant to respond to written questions under oath.
The formal response filed by a defendant in a copyright litigation case, addressing each allegation made in the plaintiff's complaint.
A formal complaint filed by the plaintiff in a copyright litigation case, alleging that the defendant has infringed upon the plaintiff's copyrighted work.
A sample direct examination outline for the trial testimony of a patent owner's infringement expert. This model outline addresses the expert's background and qualifications, the asserted patent, the relevant technology, the accused product, and the expert's opinions concerning literal infringement.
A non-infringement expert report for use in a patent lawsuit describing the expert's background and qualifications, the asserted patent, and relevant technology.