Case Name: Brian CONNELLY; Keith Merritt, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. HILTON GRAND VACATIONS COMPANY, LLC, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-07-17
Citations: 693 F. App'x 669
Docket Number: No. 14-55431
Parties: Brian CONNELLY; Keith Merritt, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. HILTON GRAND VACATIONS COMPANY, LLC, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before: KOZINSKI, W. FLETCHER, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 693
Pages: 669–670

Head Matter:
Brian CONNELLY; Keith Merritt, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. HILTON GRAND VACATIONS COMPANY, LLC, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 14-55431
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted on May 5, 2016
Withdrawn from Submission on February 8, 2017
Filed July 17, 2017
Resubmitted on July 17, 2017 Pasadena, California
George S. Azadian, Special Counsel, Azadian Law Group, PC, Pasadena, CA, John M. Bickford, Alexander R. Wheeler, Attorney, Parris Law Firm, Lancaster, CA, Charles Theodore Mathews, Attorney, Charles T. Mathews & Associates, San Marino, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants
Angela Christine Agrusa, Esquire, Liner LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellee
Before: KOZINSKI, W. FLETCHER, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
After the district court denied a motion for class certification, the parties stipulated to a voluntary dismissal with prejudice. Plaintiffs appeal the denial of class certification.
The Supreme Court recently held that a voluntary dismissal of this sort does not qualify as a final decision within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Microsoft Corp. v. Baker, — U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 1702, 1715, 198 L.Ed.2d 132 (2017) ("Plaintiffs in putative class actions cannot transform a tentative interlocutory order into a final judgment within the meaning of § 1291 simply by dismissing their claims with prejudice .") (internal citations omitted). We DISMISS the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
This case is resubmitted concurrently with the filing of this disposition.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.