In Re BLOOD REAGENTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION. Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, Inc., Appellant

In Re BLOOD REAGENTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION. Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, Inc., Appellant

Because the district court lacked the opportunity to consider the Supreme Court’s decision in Comcast, and because expert testimony critical to proving Rule 23 requirements must satisfy Daubert, the court vacated certification and remanded so the district court can determine which of Ortho’s reliability attacks implicate the Rule 23 showing, resolve any Daubert challenges in the first instance, and then definitively assess predominance and other Rule 23 requirements in light of Comcast.

Citation
783 F.3d 183; 91 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 693; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 5630; 2015 WL 1543101
Parties
Plaintiff/appellee: Direct purchaser plaintiffs (class); Defendant/appellant: Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, Inc.; Defendant (settled): Immucor, Inc.
Court
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Jurisdiction
United States
Judgment Date
8 April 2015
Case Number
12-4067
Procedural Posture
Antitrust Multidistrict Litigation (direct Purchaser Action) / Appeal of District Court Class Certification Order Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(f)
Outcome
vacated and remanded
Legal Topics
Class Certification, Predominance, Daubert, Expert Testimony, Damages Model, Comcast V. Behrend
Source Language
English
Antitrust Civil Procedure Evidence Class Actions Class Certification Predominance Daubert Expert Testimony +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Direct purchaser plaintiffs (class)

Plaintiff/appellee

Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, Inc.

Defendant/appellant

Immucor, Inc.

Defendant (settled)

Procedural Posture

Antitrust Multidistrict Litigation (direct Purchaser Action) / Appeal of District Court Class Certification Order Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(f)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Rule 23 requires Daubert scrutiny of expert testimony critical to class certification
  2. 2 Whether the district court erred in certifying a class in light of Comcast v. Behrend
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs’ damages model can measure only damages attributable to the alleged conspiracy and be applied classwide

Ratio Decidendi

Because the district court lacked the opportunity to consider the Supreme Court’s decision in Comcast, and because expert testimony critical to proving Rule 23 requirements must satisfy Daubert, the court vacated certification and remanded so the district court can determine which of Ortho’s reliability attacks implicate the Rule 23 showing, resolve any Daubert challenges in the first instance, and then definitively assess predominance and other Rule 23 requirements in light of Comcast.

Court Disposition

vacated and remanded

Orders

  • Class certification order vacated.
  • Remanded to the district court to determine which challenges to plaintiffs’ expert testimony are material to the Rule 23 showing, to conduct a Daubert inquiry if necessary, and to reassess certification (including predominance and damages modeling) in light of Comcast.