De Coster v. Amazon.com Inc

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT AT SEATTLE ELIZABETH DE COSTER et al., on behalf CASE NO. 2:21-cv-00693-JHC of themselves and all others similarly situated, ORDER

Plaintiffs,

v.

AMAZON.COM, INC., a Delaware corporation,

Defendant.

DEBORAH FRAME-WILSON, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly CASE NO. 2:20-cv-00424-JHC situated,

Plaintiffs, v. AMAZON.COM, INC., a Delaware corporation,

Defendant.

This matter comes before the Court on Amazon.com, Inc.’s Motion Requesting an Evidentiary Hearing on Class Certification. Case No. 21-693, Dkt. # 382; Case No. 20-424, Dkt. # 353. The Court has considered the materials filed in support of and in opposition to the

motion, the rest of the file, and the governing law. Being fully advised, the Court DENIES the motion. The record before the Court is extensive. The parties have ably and fully briefed the issues. The submissions include more than 100 pages of briefing, more than 100 exhibits, and more than 1,000 pages of expert reports. See generally Case No. 21-693 Dkt. The Court does not believe that the type of hearing Amazon requests is necessary with respect to the class certification issues presented. See Tait v. BSH Home Appliances Corp., 289 F.R.D. 466, 492 (C.D. Cal. 2012) (noting that “[a]n evidentiary hearing on class certification is not required” but courts “should assess all relevant evidence” in determining whether each of the Rule 23

requirements have been met) (citing Bouman v. Block, 940 F.2d 1211, 1232 (9th Cir. 1990)). Dated this 30th day of July, 2025. A John H. Chun United States District Judge