Whether the district court and the court of appeals improperly applied obsolete standards for approval of settlement class actions under prior caselaw rather than the current standard set out in the 2018 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(2)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW A Magistrate of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado approved a class action settlement over the objection of the Petitioners. The Tenth Circuit affirmed. The following questions are presented: 1. Did the district court and the court of appeals improperly apply obsolete standards for approval of settlement class actions under prior caselaw rather than the current standard set out in the 2018 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(2)? 2. When the settlement class was certified in the same order approving the settlement, and objections and evidence of inadequate representation and intra-class conflict of interest were before the district court and court of appeals, did the court of appeals improperly fail to require rigorous analysis and adequate findings by the district court as required by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(e)(2)? 3. When the objectors repeatedly asserted that the interests of a subclass were wrongfully “sacrificed” by the Class Representatives, did the court of appeals improperly decline to reach the issue of adequate representation on the grounds that it had been waived? 4. When the district court failed to analyze or make fact findings evidencing the exercise of its discretion, did the court of appeals improperly affirm approval of the class settlement based on its own fact findings and conclusions regarding the release given by the Class Representatives on behalf of the class?