Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-02019/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-02019-20/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

ELLEN ANNETE GOLD,

Plaintiff,

v.

MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, 

INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-02019-BLF 

ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION 

TO DECERTIFY CLASS AND ENTER 

JUDGMENT

[Re: ECF 114]

Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Stipulation to Decertify Class and Enter Judgment. 

Stipulation, ECF 114. 

Rule 23(c)(1)(C) provides that an order certifying a class “may be altered or amended 

before final judgment.” In the period before class notice, the Court’s certification order is 

“inherently tentative” and may be freely modified in light of subsequent developments in the 

litigation. Gen. Tel. Co. of Sw. v. Falcon, 457 U.S. 147, 160 (1982) (quoting Coopers & Lybrand 

v. Livesay, 437 U.S. 463, 469 n.11 (1978)). 

As set forth in the stipulation, the Court certified a class pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 23(b)(3) on October 7, 2014. Thereafter, the parties could not agree on a form of notice 

to the class and instead requested that the Court defer the issue of class notice until after ruling on 

the parties’ motions for summary judgment. The Court granted summary judgment in 

Defendants’ favor on March 20, 2015. The parties aver that “none of the approximately 43,942 

prospective class members have been given notice by Plaintiff” and now seek to decertify the class 

and enter judgment on Plaintiff’s individual claims. Stipulation at 2.

Because notice was never provided to the class members, Plaintiff never completed the 

class certification requirements of Rule 23(c)(2). See Abels v. JBC Legal Grp., P.C., No. C04-

Case 5:13-cv-02019-BLF Document 115 Filed 03/25/15 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

02345 JW, 2008 WL 782527, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 2008). Furthermore, now that the Court 

has resolved the legal question of liability in Defendant’s favor, requiring class notice would 

violate the one-way intervention rule and be a costly exercise in futility. See generally 

Schwarzschild v. Tse, 69 F.3d 293 (9th Cir. 1995) (discussing one-way intervention rule and 

holding that “when defendants obtain summary judgment before the class has been properly 

certified or before notice has been sent, they effectively waive their right to have notice circulated 

to the class under Rule 23(c)(2); in such cases, the district court’s decision binds only the named 

plaintiffs”). 

As such, the Court approves the parties’ stipulation to decertify the class. The class 

certified on October 7, 2014 at ECF 80 is hereby decertified. Judgment shall be entered in favor 

of Defendants and against Plaintiff. The Clerk of the Court shall close the case file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 25, 2015

______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:13-cv-02019-BLF Document 115 Filed 03/25/15 Page 2 of 2