T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by N i nth C i r c ui tR ul e 36- 3.

T he H on orabl e W i l l i am T . H art , D i stri ctJudg e f or the N orthern ** D i s tr i c tof

I l l i noi s , s i tt i ng by de s i gna t i on.

NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T R I C H A R D S T A N F O R D , in d iv id u a lly a n d o n b e h a lf o f a ll othe rpe r s ons s i m i l a r l y s i tua t e d a nd on behal f of the general pu bl i c, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. H O M E D E P O T U S A , I N C ., aD e l a w a r e c orpor a t i on, D ef

endant -A pp el l ee . N o. 08- 56101 D. C . No . C V- 0 8 - 5 6 1 0 1 - L AB ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e S o u th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia L a rry A . B urns , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d N ove m be r5, 2009

P a s a d e n a , C a lif

o rn ia B ef ore: G O U L D and B E A , C i rc ui tJudg es , and H A R T , D i stri ctJudg e. ** 

# FI LED NO V 24 2009 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

P la in tif f R ic h a r d S ta n f

o r d a lle g e s th a t h e p u r c h a s e d ah o t w a te rh e a te ra t a r e ta il s to r e o f

d e f e n d a n t H o m e D e p o t U .S .A ., I n c . lo c a te d in C a lif o rn ia . H e a s s e rts tha the c ontr a c t e d w i th a nd pa i d de f e nda ntt o ha ve the he a t e ri ns t a l l e d a nd approp ri at e perm i t s obt ai ned, bu tthatdefe nd antfa i l ed t o o bt ai n the neces sary perm i tand, contraryt o the part i es ' contra ct , char ged h i m m ore f or the perm i tthan the l ocal m un i ci pal i ty a ctual l y c harged. P l ai nt i ff brou gh thi s a ct i on on behal f of a p u t at i v e cl ass o f si m i l arl y si tu at ed C al i fo rn i a resi d en t s. A ft er rem o v i n g th i s case f r om s t a t e c ourt , de f

e nda ntr a i s e d aque s t i on of w he the rpl a i nt i f

f l a c ke d s t a ndi ng, w h ic h th e d is tr ic t c o u rt r e s o lv e d o n s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t. O n s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t, there w as no genu i ne fa ctual di sput e thatthe al l eged exces s perm i tchar ge w as r e f unde d on the daya f

t e rthe pur c ha s e a nd tha tape rm i tw a s i s s ue d af e w m onths a f t e rthe i ns t a l l a t i on a nd pr i ort o pl a i nt i f f f i l i ng hi s l a w s ui t . H ol di ng the r e w a s no e vi de nc e of

a ny i nj ury c aus e d t o pl a i nt i f f by ade l a y , the di s tr i c tc ourtdi s m i s s e d the c a s e w i thoutpr e

j udi c e f orl a c k of

s t a ndi ng. O n appe a l , pl a i nt i f

f c ont e nds hi s i ndi vi dua l c l a i m s t i l l e xi s t e d be c aus e the i n sp ect i o n n ecessary to co m p l et e th e p erm i tp ro cess h ad n o to ccu rred . P l ai n t i ff al so c o n te n d s th a t th e p e rm it w a s n o t is s u e d u n til a f te rh e s e n t d e f

e n d a n t n o tic e o f

as ta te c ons um e rl a w vi ol a t i on a nd tha tde f e nda ntm a y not" pi c k of f " the na m e d pl a i nt i f

f of a put at i ve cl as s a ct i on by prov i di ng re l i ef on l y t o thatpers on . Iti s f urther3

c ont e nde d tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourtvi ol a t e d F e d. R . C i v. P . 56( f ) by nota l l ow i ng p la in tif f a n o p p o rtu n ity f

o rd is c o v e ry p r io rto ru lin g o n s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t. A l t ernat i vel y, pl ai nt i ff

cont ends the di stri ctcourtshou l d h ave permi tt ed di sc ov ery as t o con t ac ti nform at i on for put at i ve cl as s m em bers so thata new nam ed pl ai nt i ff coul d h ave been subst i tut ed for pl ai nt i ff . A di s tr i c tc ourt ' s s um m a ry j udgm e ntrul i ng i s r e vi e w e d de no vo . S p r i n t PCS A ss et s, L . L . C . v. C i t

y of P al os V erdes Estat es , 5 8 3 F .3 d 7 1 6 , 7 2 0 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) . A s t o the R ul e 56( f

) i s s ue , " [ d] i s tr i c tc ourt s ha ve w i de l a t i tude i n c ontr ol l i ng di s c ove ry , a nd de c i s i ons nott o pe rm i tf urthe rdi s c ove ry i n r e s pons e t o m ot i ons m a de pur s ua ntt o F e de r a l R ul e of C i vi l P r oc e dur e 56( f

) a r e r e vi e w e d f

orabus e of d i scret i o n . " U

ni ted Stat es v. John son C on trol s, Inc. , 45 7 F . 3d 10 09 , 10 23 (9th C i r. 20 06 ). A rtic le I I I s ta n d in g g o e s to ac o u rt's s u b je c t m a tte rju r is d ic tio n . C e tac e an Cm t y. v. B u sh , 3 8 6 F .3 d 1 1 6 9 , 1 1 7 4 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) . A rtic le I I I r e q u ir e s th a t a pl a i nt i f f " s how tha t( 1) i tha s s uf f e r e d a n ' i nj ury i n f

a c t ' tha ti s ( a ) c onc r e t e a nd pa rt i c ul a r i z e d a nd ( b) a c tua l ori m m i ne nt , notc onj e c tur a l orhypothe t i c a l ; ( 2) the in ju ry is f a ir ly tr a c e ab le to th e c h a lle n g e d a c tio n o f th e d e f e n d a n t; a n d ( 3 ) it is l i k el y, as o p p o sed t o m erel y sp ecu l at i v e, th atth e i n j u ry w i l l b e red ressed b y a4

fav o rab l e d eci si o n . " Id . ( quot i ng Fri ends of the E arth, Inc. v. L ai dlaw E nvt l . Serv . (TO C ), Inc. , 52 8 U . S . 16 7, 18 0-81 (200 0)). P la in tif f c o n te n d s h e w a s s till s u f f e r in g a n in

ju ry a t th e tim e h e b r o u g h t th is a c tio n o n O c to b e r1 2 , 2 0 0 7 b e c au s e h is p e rm it w a s n o t le g a lly c o m p le te . U nc ont e s t e d e vi de nc e e s t abl i s he d tha ta" no- pl a n pe rm i t " w a s r e qui r e d f or pl ai nt i ff ' s hotw at erheat er . Itw as no tre qu i re d thata pl an be "r evi ew ed" bef ore c o n s tru c tio n , b u t m u n ic ip a l ru le s p r o v id e d th e w a te rh e a te rin s ta lla tio n s till h a d to b e in s p e c te d a f

te rc o m p le tio n a n d " [ t]h e p r o je c t is n o t le g a lly c o m p le te u n til it pass es the fi nal i nspect i on . " T hati nspect i on , ho w ever , need on l y be c om pl et ed pri or t o the expi ra t i on of the perm i t . U nd i sput ed evi dence es t abl i shes the w at er heat erw as i nst al l ed on M ay30 , 20 07 , a perm i ti ss ued S ept em ber 13, 20 07 before su i tw as fi l ed , an d th e p erm i td i d n o tex p i re u n t i l S ep t em b er 7 , 2 0 0 8 . Iti s al so un di sput ed that , by no l at erthan January20 08 , pl ai nt i ff l earned a permi thad b ee n i ss ued. T here i s no con t ent i on thatthe C i ty' s rul es or the part i es ' contra ctre qu i re d thatdefe nd ant ' s i nst al l ersc hedu l e or be pres entfor the i nspect i on -- pl ai nt i ff w as r e s pons i bl e f

ors c he dul i ng the i ns pe c t i on a thi s r e s i de nc e . A ny de l a y i n i nf orm i ng p la in tif f th a t ap e rm it h a d b e e n is s u e d d id n o t c au s e a" le g a l c o m p le te n e s s " in ju ry . W hen thi s a ct i on w as fi l ed, w hen i tw as re m ov ed t o federa l court , and w hen pl a i nt i f f l e a rne d of

ape rm i ti n J a nua ry 2008, he s t i l l ha d m onths t o s c he dul e a ndA toral ar gu m ent , for the fi rs tt i m e, pl ai nt i ff cont ended h e w as al so i nj ured 1 because he w as po t ent i al l y s ubj ec tt o b ei ng fi ned for havi ng the w at erheat er in s ta lle d p r io rto th e is s u a n c e o f ap e rm it. T h a t c o n te n tio n is w a iv e d f o rf a ilu r e to r a is e it e a r lie r . I n a n y e v e n t, w h ile C ity ru le s d o p e rm it af in e f o rs u c h c o n d u c t, the r e w a s no e vi de nc e s ubm i tt e d s upport i ng tha t , a s of the f i l i ng of thi s a c t i on or a n y o th e rtim e , a n y a c tu a l a n d im m in e n t th r e a t o f b e in g f in e d e x is te d . See g e n e r a lly Storm an s, Inc. v. Selec ky , ___ F . 3d ___, ___, 2009 W L 3448435 *12 ( 9 th C ir . O c t. 2 8 , 2 0 0 9 ) ; T h o m a s v . A n c h o ra g e E q u a l R ig h ts C o m m 'n , 220 F . 3d 11 34 , 11 40 -41 (9th C i r. 20 00 ). 5 c om pl e t e the r e qui r e d i ns pe c t i on. P l a i nt i f f di d nots a t i s f

y hi s bur de n of 1 e s tab lis h in g th e e x is te n c e o f a n a c tu a l in

ju ry a t th e tim e th is a c tio n w a s b r o u g h t. A l tho ug h there w as no exi st i ng i nj ury w hen thi s c as e w as brou gh t , pl ai nt i ff c o n te n d s it w a s n e v e rth e le s s im p r o p e rto " p ic kh im o f f " b y ap p ly in g f

o rth e p e rm it a f te rh e h a d s e n t th e n o tic e r e q u ir e d f o ro n e o f h is s ta te la w c la im s . See C a l . C i v. C o d e § 1 7 8 2 ( a ) ; see a l

so i d. § § 1 7 8 2 (b )-(c). B u tev en i f st at e l aw p ro v i d es a litig a n t in p la in tif

f 's s itu a tio n h a s s ta tu to ry s ta n d in g to c o n tin u e to a c t a s ap r iv a te att orney genera l i n st at e c ou rt , i n federa l courthe m ustal so sa t i sf y A rt i cl e I II s ta n d in g r e q u ir e m e n ts . L e e v . A m e r i c an N at 'l I ns . C o. , 260 F . 3d 997, 1001- 02 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) ; H

angar te rv . P r ov i de nt

L i f e & A c c i de nt

I ns . C o. , 373 F . 3d 998, 1 0 2 1 - 2 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) ; C at t i e v . W al-M art Stores , Inc. , 504 F . S upp. 2d 939, 942 ( S .D . C a l. 2 0 0 7 ) . S in c e h e h a d n o in ju ry w h e n th is a c tio n w a s b r o u g h t, p la in tif f d id n o t s a tis f y A rtic le I I I s ta n d in g r e q u ir e m e n ts . A ls o , s in c e p la in tif f h a d n o liv e c la im a n d th e r e f

o r e n o s ta n d in g w h e n th e c a s e w a s f ir s t b r o u g h t, th is is n o t as itu a tio n in6

w hi ch the ca se can con t i nu e w i th a pu t at i ve cl as s m em ber s ub st i tut ed as the nam ed p la in tif f . L i e r boe v . State Farm Mut . A uto. I ns . C o. , 3 5 0 F .3 d 1 0 1 8 , 1 0 2 2 - 2 3 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) ; B lackw el l

v. SkyW es t A i rl i nes, Inc. , 2 4 5 F .R .D . 4 5 3 , 4 6 3 ( S .D . C a l. 2 0 0 7 ) ; C h a r le s A la n W r ig h t, A rth u rR . M ille r , & M a ry K a y K a n e , Fe d. P r a c . & P r oc . C i v i l

3d § 1 7 8 5 .1 a t 4 1 8 & n .4 4 . ( 2 0 0 5 ) . C o m p a re So s n a v . I

o wa , 4 1 9 U . S. 39 3 (19 75 ) ( nam ed pl ai nt i ff ' s i nd i vi du al cl ai m beca m e m oo taf t erac t i on w as c o m m e n c e d ) ; E m

pl oyer s- T eam ster s L ocalN

os. 17 5 & 50 5 P ensi on T rust Fun d v. A n ch o r C a

p i ta l A dviso rs , 4 9 8 F .3 d 9 2 0 , 9 2 4 - 2 5 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ) ( s a m e ) ; Fed. P rac. & P r oc . C i v i l

3d § 1 78 5. 1 at40 5-15 , 42 7-28 (s am e) . In order t o p re vai l on the R ul e 56(f) i ss ue, pl ai nt i ff m ustes t abl i sh on appeal tha tthe de ni a l of

ac ont i nua nc e t o e nga ge i n di s c ove ry r e s ul t e d i n " a c tua l a nd su b st an t i al p rej u d i ce. " See M artel v. C ou nt y of L os A ng eles , 56 F . 3d 993, 995 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 9 5 ) ( e n b a n c ) . See a l so B url i ng ton N

. Sa nta Fe R . R . v. A ss i ni bo i ne & Si ou x T ri bes , 3 2 3 F .3 d 7 6 7 , 7 7 4 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) ( d is tr ic t c o u rt d id n o t e rrw h e n it re fuse d t o g rantaddi t i on al di sc ov ery und erR ul e 56(f) si nce a dd i t i on al di sc ov ery w o u ld b e f

u tile ) . A r e m an d c o u ld o n ly b e ap p r o p r ia te if p la in tif f w a s im p r o p e r ly d e n ie d th e o p p o rtu n ity to o b ta in d is c o v e ry th a t p o te n tia lly w o u ld h a v e e n ab le d h im t o avo i d d i sm i ss al by show i ng thathe suff er ed and con t i nu ed t o suffe r an i nj ury7

th atw o u l d h av e su p p o rt ed st an d i n g . T h e fact s p l ai n t i ff w as req u i red t o est ab l i sh w e r e f a c t s tha tge ne r a l l y a r e w i thi n the know l e dge of the pl a i nt i f

f , notthe defe nd ant . T he addi t i on al bri ef i ng thatw as ordered i n the di stri ctcourtconcerned

" d is c r e te is s u e s u n iq u e ly w ith in th e k n o w le d g e o f p la in tif f o re a s ily a s c e rta in ab le b y h im ." T o th e e x te n t p la in tif f c o u ld n o t e s tab lis h c la im e d in ju r ie s th r o u g h h is ow n de c l a r a t i on orobt a i n othe rc om pe t e nts upport , he s houl d ha ve be e n c apabl e of b o th d e s c r ib in g h is in

ju r ie s a n d th e a d d itio n a l d is c o v e ry h e w o u ld n e e d in o r d e rto s ubm i tc om pe t e ntpr oof . O n appe a l , how e ve r , pl a i nt i f f doe s notpoi ntt o a ny m a t e r i a l f

a c t s f a vor abl e t o hi m tha tw oul d pot e nt i a l l y ha ve be e n pr ovabl e by addi t i on al di sc ov ery, so i tcann otbe hel d thati tw as re vers i bl e e rr or t o h ave deni ed f u rth e rd is c o v e ry . See N ic h o la s v . W

a lle n s te in , 26 6 F . 3d 10 83 , 10 88 -89 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 1 ) ; i d. a t 1 0 8 9 ( T a s h im a , J ., c o n c u rr in g ) ; App l i ed Inf o. Sci . C orp. v. eBA Y

, Inc. , 511 F . 3d 966, 969 n. 1 ( 9th C i r . 2007) ( pl a i nt i f f di d notm a ke c l e a ron appe a l how addi t i on al t i m e t o fi l e i t s bri ef op po si ng sum m ary j ud gm entw ou l d h ave prec l ud ed sum m ary j ud gm ent ). L as t , pl ai nt i ff

cont ends he shou l d h ave been permitt ed di sc ov ery a s t o con t ac t i nf orm a t i on f

orput a t i ve c l a s s m e m be r s . H ow e ve r , s i nc e pl a i nt i f f l a c ke d s t a ndi ng w he n the c a s e w a s f

i r s tbr ought , di s m i s s a l c oul d notha ve be e n a voi de d by8

s u b s titu tin g ad if

f e r e n t n a m e d p la in tif

f . I t w a s n o t e rr o rto d e n y s u c h d is c o v e ry . See L i e r boe , 3 5 0 F .3 d a t 1 0 2 3 ; B la c kw e ll , 245 F . R . D . a t463.

AF F I RME D.