On February 4, Global Automakers summited a joint amicus curiae brief with the Auto Alliance in the matter of Nguyen v. Nissan North America, pending in the Ninth Circuit.  The case concerns whether plaintiffs alleging failure to disclose a product defect can achieve class certification using a “cost of repair” damages model, even where a vast majority of the proposed class has experienced no trouble with their vehicles. The District Court denied class certification because, in its view, full repair damages (cost of completely replacing the allegedly defective car part) would overcompensate the plaintiffs by wrongly treating the part as valueless. The plaintiffs petitioned for interlocutory review under Rule 23(f), and the Ninth Circuit granted the petition. Global Automakers' brief argues that the District Court correctly denied class certification and that attempts by uninjured plaintiffs to plead economic loss based on the potential for a product failure is neither credible nor compensable.  A copy of the brief is linked below.