ANTI POLICE-TERROR PROJECT et al v. CITY OF OAKLAND et al
Filing
141
REQUEST FOR SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT BRIEF RE STIPULATION TO CERTIFY CLASS to be filed by January 28, 2022. The parties may seek an extension of this date for good cause. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on January 10, 2022. (jcslc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/10/2022)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
ANTI POLICE-TERROR PROJECT, et al.,
Case No. 20-cv-03866-JCS
Plaintiffs,
10
v.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
CITY OF OAKLAND, et al.,
Defendants.
REQUEST FOR SUPPLEMENTAL
JOINT BRIEF RE STIPULATION TO
CERTIFY CLASS
Re: Dkt. No. 139
13
14
15
Although the parties have stipulated to certify a class under Rule 23(b)(2), the Court bears
16
an independent responsibility to determine whether each Rule 23 requirement is satisfied before
17
certifying a class. Zinser v. Accufix Research Inst., Inc., 253 F.3d 1180, 1186 (9th Cir. 2001)
18
(“Before certifying a class, the trial court must conduct a ‘rigorous analysis’ to determine whether
19
the party seeking certification has met the prerequisites of Rule 23.”). In its Order Denying Motion
20
for Class Certification Without Prejudice (dkt. 124), the Court found that Plaintiffs’ proposed class
21
definition did not satisfy the commonality and typicality requirements or the requirements of
22
Rule23(b)(2). Among other things, the Court expressed concern that the class was not limited to
23
peaceful protestors and that it included individuals subjected to munitions deployed by both OPD
24
and mutual aid partners. The Court also found that it was not clear any named plaintiff was
25
subjected to munitions deployed by mutual aid partners rather than OPD officers or that all of the
26
uses of tear gas to which class members were subjected were the result of a common policy or
27
course of conduct at the command staff level.
28
The Court requests that by January 28, 2022, the parties submit a joint brief addressing
1
why their proposed class definition meets the requirements of Rule 23 and addressing the specific
2
concerns set forth by the Court in its order denying class certification. The parties may seek an
3
extension of this date for good cause.
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6
7
8
Dated: January 10, 2022
______________________________________
JOSEPH C. SPERO
Chief Magistrate Judge
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?