The Ninth Circuit has just handed down its long-awaited opinion in Dukes v. Wal-Mart. Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., ___ F.3d ___ (Apr. 26, 2010). I have not yet read the opinion, but the first paragraph indicates that the class certification order was affirmed. I hope to have a further report on the opinion later today.
UPDATE: The 11-judge en banc panel split 6-5 in favor of certification. I've only had time to read up to about page 25 so far, but it already has much interesting discussion of Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit precedents. Among other things, the opinion says that Ninth Circuit law is largely in accord with In re Initial Public Offerings Securities Litig., 471 F.3d 24 (2d Cir. 2006)! (See this blog post for more on that decision.)
The case has engendered a lot of press coverage already. In a Bloomberg News report, Wal-Mart's counsel is quoted as saying that the company will seek Supreme Court review. That is not surprising. Elsewhere, the New York Times reports that "Wal-Mart Gender Case Divides Court." The Los Angeles Times story is entitled "Court: Wal-Mart to face massive class action suit."
UPDATE #2: Professor Elizabeth Chamblee Burch of the Mass Tort Litigation Blog has the most detailed report on the opinion that I can find so far in the blogosphere.