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 by9th C i r . R . 36- 3. 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 DI AN NE L. KELL EY; KENN ET H HA NSEN; J I M W ALTE RS ; M ATT MOR AL E S ; R US S E L L HA L L ; DO N SCH RO D ER, P l ai n t i ffs - A p p el l an t s, v. M I C R O S O F T C O R P O R A T I O N , a W a s hi ngt on C orpor a t i on, D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 09- 35699 D . C . N o . 2 : 0 7 -cv -0 0 4 7 5 -M JP 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 orthe W e s t e rn D i s tr i c tof W a s hi ngt on M a r s haJ . P e c hm a n, 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 A ugus t3, 2010

S e a tt l e , W a s hi ngt on B efo re: C A N B Y , T H O M P S O N an d B E R Z O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. T hi s a ct i on i nv ol ves a l l eged m i sr epre se nt at i on s and om i ss i on s i n M i cr osoft C orpor a t i on’ s ( “ M i c r os of t ” ) pr e - r e l e a s e m a rke t i ng of i t s W i ndow s V i s t aope r a t i ng



# FI LED SEP 14 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS- 2 -

s y s te m . P la in tif

f s - A p p e lla n ts D ia n n e K e lle y , K e n n e th H a n s e n , J im W a lte r s , M a tt M oral es , R usse l l H al l , and D on S chroder (c ol l ec t i vel y r ef erre d t o as “ P l ai nt i ff

s” ) appeal the deni al of thei r m ot i on for narrow ed cl as s c ert i fi ca t i on of tw o cl as se s prop osed af

t erthe di stri ctcourtdece rt i fi ed thei r ori gi nal cl as s. T he di stri ctcourt he l d tha tthe put a t i ve c l a s s e s f a i l e d t o m e e tthe pr e dom i na nc e r e qui r e m e ntof F e de r a l R ul e of

C i vi l P r oc e dur e 23( b) ( 3) . W e r e vi e w the c e rt i f i c a t i on de c i s i on f

or ab u s e o f d is c r e tio n . Se e Y

okoy am a v . Mi dland N

at ’ l L i f e I ns . C o. , 594 F . 3d 1087, 10 90 –9 1 (9th C i r. 20 10 ); I n r e W e l l s Far go H om e Mor t

g. O v e r t i m e P ayL i t i

g. , 571 F . 3d 953, 957 ( 9th C i r . 2009) . W e a f f i rm i n part , r e ve r s e i n pa rt , a nd r e m a nd f or f u rth e rp r o c e e d in g s . T he di stri ctcourtfa i l ed prop er l y t o con du ctthe predom i nance i nq ui ryun der R u le 2 3 ( b ) ( 3 ) . T o c e rtif yac la s s u n d e rR u le 2 3 ( b ) ( 3 ) , ad is tr ic t c o u rt m u s t, i nter a lia , “ det erm i ne w hether c om m on or i nd i vi du al i ss ues pre do m i nat e i n a gi ven ca se . ” D ukes v. W

al-M art Stores , Inc. , 60 3 F . 3d 57 1, 59 3 (9th C i r. 20 10 ) ( en banc) (i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed). “ [T ] he m ai n con ce rn i n the predom i nance i nq ui ry. . . [i s] the bal ance betw ee n i nd i vi du al and com m on i ss ues. ” I n r e W e lls Far go , 571 F . 3d a t959. H e r e , the di s tr i c tc ourtr e l i e d e xc l us i ve l yon i t s c onc l us i on thatcl ai m s i nv ol vi ng dece pt i ve pract i ce s broug htun der the W as hi ng t on C on sum er P r ot e c t i on A c t( “ C P A ” ) , W a s h. R e v. C ode § 19. 86. 010 e t s e q. , re qu i reC as es al l egi ng consum erfr aud and i nv ol vi ng qu es t i on s a ff ec t i ng i nd i vi du al 1 c la s s m e m b e r s a r e n o t c a te g o r ic a llyp r e c lu d e d f r o m c la s s tr e a tm e n t. See A m chem P r ods . , I nc . v . W i nds or , 52 1 U . S . 59 1, 62 5 (19 97 ); cf . W ol i n v. Jagu ar L an d R over N. Am . , LLC , N o. 09- 55104, 09- 55105, 2010 W L 3222091, a t*4 ( 9th C i r . A ug. 17, 2 0 1 0 ) .

- 3 - i ndi vi dua l i z e d pr oof

of pr oxi m a t e c aus a t i on t o f i nd tha t“ the pr e dom i na nt que s t i ons [ i n thi s put a t i ve c l a s s a c t i on] w oul d r e l a t e t o P l a i nt i f f s ’ s ubj e c t i ve u n d e r s ta n d in g o f

th e E x p r e s s U p g r a d e p r o g r a m a n d th e irin d iv id u a l b e lie f in M i c r os of t ’ s V i s t aa dve rt i s i ng c a m pa i gn. ” T he di s tr i c tc ourtf a i l e d t o c ons i de r , or t o ba l a nc e a ga i ns tthe i s s ue s r e qui r i ng i ndi vi dua l i z e d pr oof , a nyque s t i ons of

l a w or fa ctcom m on t o the E xp re ss U pg ra de cl as s m em bers , despi t e i dent i fy i ng se vera l s uc h que s t i ons i n the R ul e 23( a ) ( 2) c om m ona l i tya na l y s i s i n i t s F e brua ry2008 ce rt i fi ca t i on order. Se e I n r e W e l l s Far go , 5 7 1 F .3 d a t 9 5 9 ( h o ld in g th a t it is 1 re vers i bl e e rr or t o “ re l y[ ] on [one fa ct or] t o the near e xcl usi on of other f ac t ors r e le v a n t to th e p r e d o m in a n c e in q u iry ” ) . I n a ddi t i on, c ontr a ryt o the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s s uppos i t i on, the E xpr e s s U pgr a de c l a s s m e m be r s ’ unde r s t a ndi ng of the E xpr e s s U pgr a de pr ogr a m a nd know l e dge of M i c r os of t ’ s V i s t aa dve rt i s i ng c a m pa i gn is a m e n ab le to c la s s - w id e tr e a tm e n t in s om e r e s pe c t s . F ori ns t a nc e , c om m on que s t i ons e xi s tr e ga r di ng the e xt e ntof the c o n s u m e re d u c a tio n e f

f o rts th a t M ic r o s o f

t a lle g e d lyc o n tr o lle d th r o u g h its W i nd ow s V i st a C apabl e m arket i ng prog ram . F urther, thi s c as e i s unl i ke i nst ance s- 4 -

w he r e the a l l e ge d m i s r e pr e s e nt a t i on goe s t o onl yone f e a tur e of the pr oduc ta nd the r e a r e num e r ous r e a s ons w hyac ons um e rm i ghtus e the pr oduc tothe rtha n the f e a tu r e m is r e p r e s e n te d . See P ou los v. Caesars W orld, Inc. , 379 F . 3d 654, 665, 667 ( 9th C i r . 2004) . T he a l l e ge dl yf unda m e nt a l a s pe c t s of

the pr oduc ts oughtthr ough the E xp re ss U pg ra de prog ram ar e l ar gel y e ncom pass ed w i thi n the al l eged m i s r e pr e s e nt a t i on— na m e l y , tha tac om put e rl abe l e d “ V i s t aC apabl e ” a nd up gradeabl e t o W i nd ow s V i st a H om e B as i c c ou l d run “ V i st a. ” C f. id. a t665 ( n o tin g th e “u n iq u e n a tu r e o f g a m b lin g tr a n s a c tio n s ” a n d h o ld in g th a t “g a m b lin g is no ta c on t exti n w hi ch [the court ] can ass um e thatpo t ent i al cl as s m em bers ar e a lw a y s s im ila r lys itu a te d ” ) . Fi n a l l y , th e d i s tr i c tc o u rtd i d n o tc o n s i d e rw h e th e ro th e re l e me n t s o f aCPA cl ai m p resen tq u est i o n s o f l aw o r factco m m o n o r i n d i v i d u al t o th e cl ass m em b ers, and w hatef

fe cttho se qu es t i on s, i f any, have on the R ul e 23(b)(3) predom i nance in q u iry . F o rin s ta n c e , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d idn o t d e te rm in e w h e th e rth e a lle g e d ly de c e pt i ve pr a c t i c e a f

f e c t s the publ i c i nt e r e s t , w hi c h i t s e l f i nvol ve s c ons i de r a t i on of s e v e r a l f a c to r s . Se e, e . g. , P anag v . Farm e rs I ns . C o. of

W as h. , 204 P . 3d 885, 889 ( W a s h . 2 0 0 9 ) . A c c or di ngl y , w e r e ve r s e the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s de ni a l of c l a s s c e rt i f

i c a t i on a nd r e m a n d to th e d is tr ic t c o u rt f o rf u rth e rc e rtif

ic a tio n p r o c e e d in g s c o n s is te n t w ith th is- 5 -

di sposi t i on . W e s tre ss thatby do i ng so, w e e xp re ss no vi ew concerni ng w hether on a proper anal ys i s, the deni al of cl as s c ert i fi ca t i on w ou l d b e w i thi n the di stri ct c ourt ’ s di s c r e t i on. T he di s tr i c tc ourtdi d note rri n c onc l udi ng tha tthe c l a i m s a s s e rt e d bythe prop osed W i nd ow s D ri ver D evi ce M od el (“ W D D M ”) cl as s are bestchar ac t er i ze d a s pr i m a r i l yi nvol vi ng a l l e ga t i ons of a f f i rm a t i ve m i s r e pr e s e nt a t i ons , a nd not m a te r ia l o m is s io n s . P la in tif f s a r g u e th a t th e W D D M c la s s d e f in itio n ’s e x p lic it r e f e r e nc e t o pe r s ons w ho pur c ha s e d ape r s ona l c om put e r( “ P C ” ) c e rt i f i e d by M i c r os of ta s “ V i s t aC apabl e ” i s t o i de nt i f yW D D M c l a s s m e m be r s onl y . E ve n s o, th e a r g u m e n t u n d e r ly in g th e W D D M c la s s ’ c la im s is th a t M ic r o s o f t a f f irm a tiv e ly m arket ed ce rt ai n P C s a s V i st a C apabl e e ven tho ug h they c ou l d n otsupp ort W D D M , a d i sp l ay d ri v er al l eg ed l y req u i red t o o p erat e V i st a. A d d i t i o n al l y, re gardl es s of w hether M i cr osoft ’ s a l l eged kn ow i ng fa i l ure t o revealthatpre- l aunch V i st a C apabl e P C s c ou l d n otsupp ortW D D M i s adece pt i ve ac tor prac t i ce un der the C P A , the fa i l ure t o d i sc l ose thati nform at i on i s r el evanton l y i nsofaras M i c r os of ta l s o r e pr e s e nt e d tha tV i s t aC apabl e P C s w e r e i n f a c tc apabl e of

runni ng ave r s i on of

V i s t a . P l a i nt i f

f s ’ c om pl a i nti s i ns truc t i ve on thi s i s s ue , a s i tc ont a i ns a lle g a tio n s b a s e d o n b o th a f f irm a tiv e m is r e p r e s e n ta tio n s a n d o m is s io n s . T he W D D M cl as s’ cl ai m s are there fore no t“ base [d] . . . on l y on w hat[M i cr osoft- 6 -

alleg ed ly] d idn o t d isclo se ,” b u t rath er“as m u ch o n w h at [w as sa id ] as w h at [w a]s pu rport edl y [ l ef

tou t ] . ” P oulos , 379 F . 3d a t667. A c c or di ngl y , w e a f f i rm the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s de ni a l of c e rt i f i c a t i on of

the W D D M c l a s s on the the orytha tthe W D D M c la s s is e n title d to ap r e s u m p tio n o f r e lia n c e . A F F IR M E D i n p art, R E V E R S E D i n p art, an d R E M A N D E D for f u rt h er p ro ceed i n g s.