That's the name of this brief article by law professor Linda Mullinex. Here's the abstract:
Commentary
and analysis on case law developments in the lower federal courts,
approximately one year after the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (June 20, 2011). In the
wake of the Court’s Wal-Mart decision, several melodramatic commentators
suggested that the Court’s decision signaled a death-knell for class
actions, in light of the Court’s tightening the standard for class
certification threshold requirement for proving commonality under Rule
23(a)(2). The negative commentary on the Wal-Mart decision further
suggested that the Court’s decision would signal a set-back for future
Title VII gender-based class employment discrimination litigation. This
analysis of emerging lower court cases suggests that any pronouncements
of the death of class litigation in the wake of the Wal-Mart decision
seem premature. Instead, among the few courts that have evaluated the
newly articulated commonality standards, courts have certified class
actions holding that the class proponents were able to satisfy those
standards. In addition, in two California federal courts – where the
Wal-Mart litigation arose – have not found the Wal-Mart commonality
requirement to be an impenetrable barrier to class certification.
