The changing landscape of class certification jurisprudence has been marked by increasingly stringent standards. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court in Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes emphasized that trial courts must conduct a “rigorous analysis” in evaluating whether the requirements for class certification are satisfied.1 The Supreme Court noted that the mandated “rigorous analysis” frequently will overlap with the merits.
This trend toward stricter certification standards has been on prominent display in cases under Rule 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 23(b)(3) provides that certification is available if “the court finds that the questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members, and that a class action is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating the controversy.”2
