U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2001

Zinser v. Accufix Research Institute, Inc.

Zinser v. Accufix Research Institute, Inc.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided December 14, 2001 · Fletcher, Gould, Scannlain
273 F.3d 1266; 2001 Daily Journal DAR 12963; 2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10393; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 26570; 2001 WL 1591131 (Federal Reporter, Third Series)

Zinser v. Accufix Research Institute, Inc.

Opinion of the Court

Opinion by Judge GOULD; Dissent by Judge B. FLETCHER.

ORDER

The majority opinion filed June 15, 2001, is amended as follows:

1) Add the following sentence to the end of the third paragraph of section III. B. 4 (Superiority, Rule 23(b)(3)(D)):
Of course, we do not suggest that the causation difficulties necessarily render class certification impossible.

Judges O’Scannlain and Gould have voted to deny the petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc. Judge Fletcher has voted to grant the petition for rehearing and recommended granting the petition for rehearing en banc.

The full court was advised of the petition for rehearing en banc. An active judge requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. The matter failed to receive a majority of the votes of the active judges in favor of en banc consideration. Fed. R.App. P. 35.

The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.