NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
OCT 24 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
NANCY VITOLO, individually, and on No. 14-56706
behalf of other members of the general
public similarly situated, D.C. No.
2:09-cv-07728-DSF-PJW
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. MEMORANDUM*
BLOOMINGDALE’S, INC., an Ohio
corporation,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Dale S. Fischer, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted October 6, 2016
Pasadena, California
Before: PREGERSON, NOONAN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
We vacate the district court’s judgment and remand to the district court for
further proceedings in light of the California Supreme Court’s decision in Iskanian
v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal. 4th 348 (2014), the Ninth
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Circuit’s decision in Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail North America, Inc., 803 F.3d 425
(9th Cir. 2015), and the California Court of Appeal’s decision in Perez v. U-Haul
Co. of California, No. B262029, 2016 WL 4938809 (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 16, 2016).
VACATED AND REMANDED.
The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.
2