United States: Supreme Court To Decide Whether American Pipe Permits Successive Class Actions After Statute Of Limitations Has Expired

On March 26, 2018, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh to decide whether tolling principles permit an absent class member to bring a subsequent class action outside the limitations period. The key issue in the case is whether the Court's landmark decision, American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah, tolls the statute of limitations for individual as well as class actions after the limitations period has expired.1 At oral argument, the Court appeared divided and peppered both sides with questions about the limits of equitable tolling and the practical problems that might arise if American Pipe were extended to permit successive class actions. A decision is expected later this year.


China Agritech was a holding company listed on the NASDAQ stock exchange whose subsidiaries sold organic compound fertilizers in China. In 2011, China Agritech's stock price dropped after the company was confronted with allegations of fraudulent business practices. The SEC subsequently revoked China Agritech's stock registration.

Thereafter, in 2011 and 2012, shareholders sued China Agritech in two successive putative class action suits within the two-year limitations period set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1658(b). In these suits, the shareholders alleged violations of §§ 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 and for violations of the Securities Act of 1933. The matters were assigned to the same judge, who denied class certification in both cases; the matters subsequently settled.

In 2014, shareholder Michael Resh brought a third putative class action against China Agritech and individual defendants alleging Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 claims premised on the same facts and circumstances as in the previous two cases. The district court granted China Agritech's motion to dismiss the case as time-barred because it had been filed after the two-year limitations period had expired. 2 After observing that the Supreme Court in American Pipe had not addressed whether the limitations period was tolled to allow new class claims to be brought, the district court held that, while the limitations period was tolled to allow the named plaintiff to bring individual claims, class action claims were not tolled. 3 The court reasoned that to hold to the contrary "would allow tolling to extend indefinitely as class action plaintiffs repeatedly attempt to demonstrate suitability for class certification on the basis of different expert testimony and/or other evidence." 4

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed, with a three-judge panel holding that American Pipe tolls the limitations period to allow absent class members to bring their own individual claims and class actions. 5 The Ninth Circuit reasoned that, "permitting future class action named plaintiffs, who were unnamed class members in previously uncertified classes, to avail themselves of American Pipe tolling would advance the policy objectives that led the Supreme Court to permit tolling in the first place." 6 The Supreme Court granted China Agritech's petition for a writ of certiorari.7

Oral Argument

At oral argument, China Agritech faced a barrage of questions from Justices Kagan and Sotomayor. In response to questions from Justice Kagan about the extent to which plaintiffs may rely on a pending class action to toll the limitations period under American Pipe, counsel for China Agritech argued that absent class members who did not exercise diligence in filing a class action within the limitations period should not be entitled to equitable tolling.

Justice Sotomayor pressed China Agritech on whether this position is at odds with the Court's reasoning in American Pipe, noting: "So your regime is now encouraging the very thing that American Pipe was trying to avoid, which is to have a multiplicity of suits being filed and encouraging every class member to come forth and file their own suit." Justice Kagan similarly observed that China Agritech's position may run contrary to the policy behind Rule 23, noting "we don't want to have a million individual suits but instead want to encourage a class." Justice Kagan further expressed concern for situations involving valid small dollar claims where it would be "ridiculous" for plaintiffs to pursue individual claims after a class failed. Justice Sotomayor also questioned whether there was a basis to deprive plaintiffs taking advantage of American Pipe tolling of the procedural rights of Rule 23. Counsel for China Agritech attempted to allay these concerns by identifying docket management tools that federal courts have to address the potential volume of suits, such as consolidation orders.

Respondents argued China Agritech's characterization of "diligence" ran contrary to the purpose of the Court's holding in American Pipe, which was to encourage plaintiffs not to file duplicative claims. Absent plaintiffs who wait until class certification fails before bringing suit, therefore, are exercising diligence in reliance on the American Pipe decision. 

Respondents were questioned by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Gorsuch about the specter of serial class actions. The Chief Justice stated that, "there's no end in sight" because "if you allow the second, you've got to allow the third and then the fourth and the fifth." Justice Gorsuch added that plaintiffs could "stack" class actions forever such that the "statute of limitations never really has any force in these cases." Respondents argued that, in practice, there was a limiting principle because plaintiffs would have to identify different reasons why the successive class should be certified and courts could rely on statutes of repose in the securities context and comity in other circumstances to limit these new actions.

Justice Sotomayor questioned both sides about the possibility of reaching a middle ground–like the Third and Eighth Circuits–which have permitted successive class actions where there are deficiencies in the lead plaintiff's representation of the class. China Agritech reiterated its position that once the limitations period has expired, these claims too should be barred. Respondents argued that the Third and Eighth Circuit approach is fair as a matter of equity, but that it requires courts to engage in a more robust analysis of the previous suit and the reasons for its dismissal.


The impact of the Supreme Court's decision in China Agritech will be felt in the securities realm and beyond. If the Court affirms the Ninth Circuit's holding, defendants may face the prospect of successive class actions even after they have resolved previous actions involving the same claims, and the applicable statute of limitations will have little significance. On the other hand, if the Court adopts China Agritech's argument or the Third and Eighth Circuits' compromise position, plaintiffs may choose to file multiple class actions earlier. This could result in parallel class claims, or the consolidation of related actions.


1 The Court, which interpreted American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah, 414 U.S. 538 (1974), last year in California Public Employees''Retirement System v. ANZ Securities, Inc., 137 S. Ct. 2042 (2017), is once again called upon to interpret this decision in China Agritech. For background on the ANZ Securities case, please see Advisory, Supreme Court Rejects Equitable Tolling of Claims Under the Securities Act's Statute of Repose, June 28, 2017.

2 Resh v. China Agritech, Inc., No. CV1405083RGKPJWX, 2014 WL 12599849, at *5 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 1, 2014), rev'd, 857 F.3d 994 (9th Cir. 2017).

3 Id.

4 Id.

5 Resh v. China Agritech, Inc., 857 F.3d 994, 1005 (9th Cir. 2017), cert. granted, 138 S. Ct. 543 (2017).

6 Id. at 1004.

7 In support of its petition for certiorari, China Agritech noted that various Courts of Appeal have reached different conclusions on whether American Pipetolling reaches otherwise untimely class actions. Compare Basch v. Ground Round, Inc., 139 F.3d 6, 11 (1st Cir. 1998) (American Pipe tolling only applies to individual claims); Korwek v. Hunt, 837 F.2d 874, 879 (2d Cir. 1987) (same); Salazar-Calderon v. Presidio Valley Farmers Ass'n, 765 F.2d 1334, 1351 (5th Cir. 1985) (same); Griffin v. Singletary, 17 F.3d 356, 359 (11th Cir. 1994) (same), with Yang v. Odom, 392 F.3d 97, 111 (3d Cir. 2004) (American Pipe tolling can apply to subsequent class actions where class certification has not been denied on the basis of the suitability of the claims for class treatment); Great Plains Trust Co. v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 492 F.3d 986, 997 (8th Cir. 2007) (same), and Atlas Heating & Sheet Metal Works, Inc., 642 F.3d 560, 564 (7th Cir. 2011) (American Pipe applies to both individual and class actions); Phipps v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 792 F.3d 637, 652 (6th Cir. 2015) (same).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions