No. 24-630

Union Pacific Railroad Company, a Delaware Corporation v. Nicholas DeFries

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2024-12-09
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Experienced Counsel
Tags: american-pipe-rule circuit-split class-action class-certification statute-of-limitations tolling-doctrine
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities ClassAction
Latest Conference: 2025-03-21
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is American Pipe tolling limited to actual members of the putative or certified class, or does it extend to non-class members so long as they were not 'unambiguously excluded' from the class?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED In American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah, 414 U.S. 538, 554 (1974), this Court held that “the commencement of a class action suspends the applicable statute of limitations as to all asserted members of the class who would have been parties had the suit been permitted to continue as a class action.” This case involves a certified class action where the class was narrowed and then decertified. The Ninth Circuit held, consistent with the Fifth and Eighth Circuits, but in conflict with the Fourth and Tenth Circuits, that in this situation American Pipe tolling should be extended beyond “members of the class” to include persons who were not “members of the class” so long as they were not “unambiguously excluded” from the class. App. 25a. The question presented is: Is American Pipe tolling limited to actual members of the putative or certified class, or does it extend to non-class members so long as they were not “unambiguously excluded” from the class?

Docket Entries

2025-03-24
Petition DENIED.
2025-02-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/21/2025.
2025-02-26
Reply of Union Pacific Railroad Company submitted.
2025-02-26
Reply of petitioner Union Pacific Railroad Company filed. (Distributed)
2025-02-12
Brief of Nicholas DeFries, et al. in opposition submitted.
2025-02-12
2025-01-28
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including February 12, 2025.
2025-01-27
Motion of Nicholas DeFries, et al. for an extension of time submitted.
2025-01-27
Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 7, 2025 to February 12, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-12-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 7, 2025.
2024-12-17
Motion of Nicholas DeFries, et al. for an extension of time submitted.
2024-12-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 8, 2025 to February 7, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-12-02
2024-10-10
Application (24A340) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until December 5, 2024.
2024-10-07
Application (24A340) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from October 21, 2024 to December 5, 2024, submitted to Justice Kagan.

Attorneys

Nicholas DeFries, et al.
Matthew W.H. WesslerGupta Wessler LLP, Respondent
Matthew W.H. WesslerGupta Wessler LLP, Respondent
Union Pacific Railroad Company
Thomas Henderson Dupree Jr.Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Petitioner
Thomas Henderson Dupree Jr.Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Petitioner