• videocam Live Webinar with Live Q&A
  • calendar_month June 25, 2026 @ 1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT
  • signal_cellular_alt Intermediate
  • card_travel Class Action & Other Litigation
  • schedule 90 minutes

Striking Class Allegations Pre-Certification: Strategies and Tactical Considerations at Pleading Stage

Legal Standards, Grounds to Strike, Recent Trends, Best Practices

About the Course

Introduction

This CLE course will discuss the if, when, and how of using motions to strike class allegations and defeating class actions pre-certification.

Description

Both Rule 12(f) and Rule 23 allow defendants to move to strike class allegations, which if successful, prevent certification or at least reduce the size of the class with attendant benefits concerning scope of discovery and cost. The burdens of proof are different under each rule, and different jurisdictions consider one or the other rule more appropriate.

Losing a motion to strike does not waive the ability to defend the case nor materially alter the parties' bargaining power on settlement.

While any legal deficiency, weak, or otherwise implausible class allegation is fair game, certain defects are excellent candidates for strike motions, including personal jurisdiction, nationwide class definitions, and predominance/commonality which focus on variations in state law and individualized questions of injury.

Listen as our panel of experienced class action practitioners discusses recent trends regarding motions to strike class allegations.

Presented By

Gerald L. Maatman Jr.
Partner, Chair of Class Action Defense Group
Duane Morris LLP

Mr. Maatman has nearly four decades of experience practicing law and has defended some of the most significant bet-the-company cases ever filed against corporate America. He has represented companies, executive teams and boards across the country in class action litigation, ranging in size from thousands to hundreds of thousands of claims by employees. Among Mr. Maatman's accomplishments, he defended and defeated the largest systemic enforcement action ever brought in the history of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the first Attorney General prosecution of a Wall Street company for workplace discrimination and harassment, and the largest wage and hour class and collective actions ever brought in Florida and New York. While he is known to be a fierce litigator, Mr. Maatman also helps his clients anticipate large-scale litigation risks before they happen to prevent issues that could turn into litigation. Mr. Maatman pioneered the process of conducting employment-practices audits to assist employers in structuring effective and practical personnel policies and protocols. He also writes and lectures extensively on class action and employment litigation topics. Mr. Maatman has authored six books on employment law topics and has spoken to employer groups throughout the United States, as well as in Asia, Europe, Canada and Mexico.

Archis A. Parasharami
Partner
Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP

Mr. Parasharami has more than two decades of experience representing businesses in class actions, complex litigation, mass arbitrations and appellate matters. He has significant experience handling all aspects of class actions and complex litigation, with a particular focus on developing and executing strategies to secure dismissals of class actions and denials of class certification, in addition to helping businesses achieve settlements on highly favorable terms. Mr. Parasharami also is recognized nationally for his deep experience in drafting arbitration agreements, especially in the consumer and employment contexts, and defending the enforceability of those agreements. Most notably, he was part of the team that represented AT&T Mobility in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, in which the Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts state law rules that would decline to enforce arbitration agreements solely because they waive class actions. Mr. Parasharami represented the company through all stages of the case while at his former firm, from federal district court to the Supreme Court, where he helped draft the winning briefs. While at his prior firm, he also represented the successful petitioners in several Supreme Court cases that focused on the enforceability of arbitration agreements.

Kevin S. Ranlett
Partner
Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP

Mr. Ranlett has extensive experience defending companies in complex, high-stakes class and representative actions in state and federal courts across the United States, as well as in mass arbitrations. He is a trusted adviser to numerous multinational corporations across a variety of industries, including advanced technology, financial services, telecommunications and insurance, among others. Mr. Ranlett has successfully resolved a wide variety of claims, including allegations of false or deceptive advertising and data breach and other privacy claims. He has also guided companies through claims involving the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, Fair Credit Reporting Act, Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Truth in Lending Act, Military Lending Act, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, the Alien Tort Claims Act and various consumer protection and unfair trade and deceptive practices laws. In addition, Mr. Ranlett counsels clients on drafting and enforcing arbitration agreements, establishing fair and effective dispute resolution programs for consumers and workers and complying with consumer protection laws. He has served as a professorial lecturer in law and taught classes on advanced appellate advocacy at the George Washington University Law School.

Credit Information
  • This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.


  • Live Online


    On Demand

Date + Time

  • event

    Thursday, June 25, 2026

  • schedule

    1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT

I. Legal standards

II. Legal bases for motions to strike class allegations

III. Recent trends for strike motions

IV. Grounds for successful motions to strike

A. Rule 23(a) factors

B. Rule 23(b) factors

C. Personal jurisdiction

D. Nationwide class definitions

V. Best practices

The panel will review these and other key issues:

  • Is the pleading stage too early to challenge class claims?
  • What are the pros and cons of moving to strike class claims?
  • What impact does a strike motion have on individual and class claims and settlement?