See id. at 140-141. As discussed below, based on these seven Quinault factors and general equitable interests, class certification is appropriate. The court is given wide discretion to determine on a case by case basis if the numerosity requirement is met. In this case, the prospective class of over 500 members meets the requirement. In deciding whether a proposed class is manageable, the court considers whether the members are readily identifiable and reachable.
Defendant challenges the manageability of the proposed class.
In particular, it argues that in order to identify those individuals whose bonuses were recouped, the government will have to manually sort through thousands of pay records. The court believes there is a distinction between characterizing the class for purposes of notification and subsequent specific identification for purposes of class inclusion. The defendant incorrectly assumes that it will be responsible for identifying with certainty the names and addresses of all class members. The identification process for purposes of class notification would have two parts. Once potential class members self-identify as a result of either methods of notification, the task of confirming who is properly within the class because their bonuses were recouped, although still necessary, is less arduous, because the number of individuals is smaller.