You might recall the settlement approval in Online DVD Antitrust Litigation we briefed back in 2012. A district court held that the Wal-Mart $12.03 “gift cards” the settlement awarded weren’t “coupons,” refused to apply the Class Action Fairness Act, and awarded fees based on the face value of the coupons.
Wait a second! careful readers exclaim, Didn’t you already win that exact issue on appeal?!
Yep. Appellees made the same arguments about “settlement vouchers” and attorney-fee calculations in Redman v. RadioShack Corp., 768 F.3d 622 (7th Cir. 2014), and that court, in a Judge Posner opinion, rejected them in a lengthy and lively discussion that was widely discussed.
So what did the Ninth Circuit say to reject the contrary Seventh Circuit case?
Absolutely nothing. They didn’t mention it once, though we filed a Rule 28(j) letter in September.
Was there another appellate precedent that they followed instead?
Nope. Some district courts make the same mistake that Redman criticized (though some don’t), and the Ninth Circuit followed those cases without mentioning the others while creating a circuit split.
Well, we’ve asked for rehearing or rehearing en banc. If we don’t get correction, we have an interesting circuit split to put before the Supreme Court in a certiorari petition.