This past week, the U.S. Supreme Court relisted the Whirlpool and Sears front-load washer cases for the third time. Whirlpool Corp. v. Glaser, No. 13-431 (U.S.); Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Butler, No. 13-430 (U.S.).
The cases are scheduled for conference again today (Friday, Jan. 24, 2014). The Court has been announcing its cert. grants on Fridays lately, so if the cases are taken up, we may hear about it today. UPDATE: No cert. grants were announced on Friday, Jan. 24, so check the orders list Monday.
If they are relisted again, I would expect the dockets to be updated to reflect this on Monday.
In related news, the Court is considering a third cert. petition involving class certification issues, BSH Home Appliances Corp. v. Cobb, no. 13-138. This case has been relisted four times, and will be conferenced again today.
BSH also involves front-load washers, but the substantive issues for review appear to be different; they relate to the proper interpretation of Comcast as well as expert testimony at the class certification stage (an issue many thought would be addressed in Comcast but wasn't). As stated in the cert. petition, these are the questions presented:
(1) Whether after Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 133 S. Ct. 1426 (2013), the absence of a showing that injury can be proved on a classwide basis precludes class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3).
(2) Whether at the class certification stage of litigation a district court must analyze the admissibility of expert testimony under the standards set forth in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
(Hyperlinks added.) The district court granted class certification, Tait v. BSH Home Appliances Corp., 289 F.R.D. 466 (C.D. Cal. 2012), and the Ninth Circuit denied the defendant's petition for permission to appeal under Rule 23(f).
For links to more of the briefs, see the SCOTUSblog case page.