Law360, New York (August 5, 2014, 10:47 AM EDT) -- In an attempt to quash consumer class actions at the class certification stage, product manufacturers defending against such suits have recently stepped-up arguments that their own money-back guarantee refund policies provide consumers with a superior method for obtaining financial redress and that class certification is therefore inappropriate pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3).[1] Specifically, defendants have argued that because they already offer to provide dissatisfied customers with a refund, a class action cannot be deemed "superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating the controversy" as required for certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3). While some courts have been receptive to this argument, two federal judges in California recently rejected such reasoning, finding that the plain language of Rule 23(b)(3) prohibits consideration of out-of-court remedial procedures that do not fall squarely within the meaning of "adjudication."[2]...