D.C. Circuit denies class certification where putative antitrust class includes uninjured class members

In a prior post [First Circuit addresses an issue that continues to vex (and split) the circuits: should a class be certified that includes uninjured class members? (October 24, 2018)], we reported on a First Circuit antitrust decision (In re Asacol Antitrust Litigation, 907 F.3d 42 (1st Cir. 2018)) that surveyed the state of the law and ruled that if a class definition includes uninjured class members (or at least class members whose injury cannot be presumed), a class cannot be certified because individual issues will predominate.  We now add another federal circuit court of appeals to that list:  In re Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 1869, --- F.3d ---, 2019 WL 3850581 (D.C. Cir., Aug. 16, 2019).  That case involved an alleged class of more than 16,000 shippers allegedly injured by a price-fixing conspiracy among the largest freight railroads in the United States.  The district court denied class certification because the “regression analysis” performed by the class plaintiffs’ expert witness – which constituted the class members’ class-wide evidence for proving causation, injury, and damages – measured negative or no damages for over 2,000 members of the putative class.  2019 WL 3850581, at *1.  Because (among other reasons), over 2,000 class members was not de minimus, the D.C. Circuit affirmed.  Id. at *4-6.  As with Asacol, the D.C. Circuit’s decision outlines a defense strategy for opposing putative classes that include uninjured members.

Knowledge assets are defined in the study as confidential information critical to the development, performance and marketing of a company’s core business, other than personal information that would trigger notice requirements under law. For example,
The new study shows dramatic increases in threats and awareness of threats to these “crown jewels,” as well as dramatic improvements in addressing those threats by the highest performing organizations. Awareness of the risk to knowledge assets increased as more respondents acknowledged that their