NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT OCT 24 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS NANCY VITOLO, individually, and on No. 14-56706 behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, D.C. No. 2:09-cv-07728-DSF-PJW Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. MEMORANDUM*

BLOOMINGDALE’S, INC., an Ohio corporation,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Dale S. Fischer, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted October 6, 2016 Pasadena, California

Before: PREGERSON, NOONAN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

We vacate the district court’s judgment and remand to the district court for

further proceedings in light of the California Supreme Court’s decision in Iskanian

v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal. 4th 348 (2014), the Ninth

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Circuit’s decision in Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail North America, Inc., 803 F.3d 425

(9th Cir. 2015), and the California Court of Appeal’s decision in Perez v. U-Haul

Co. of California, No. B262029, 2016 WL 4938809 (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 16, 2016).

VACATED AND REMANDED.

The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.

2