This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
The case was heard in oral argument before the Supreme Court at 10:11 a.m.
A Rule 23(f) petition can be used to seek interlocutory appeal; if that is not pursued, the party retains a full right of appeal at the end of the case.
Background and question before the Court
The district court issued a decertification order on February 20.
No Rule 23(f) petition was filed within the required 14‑day period after the order.
A Rule 23(f) petition was filed 14 days later, making the appeal improperly timely.
What each side argues
Petitioner (NUTRACEUTICAL CORPORATION)
According to Mr. Herstoff, petitioner argues that the district court mis‑advised the party on how much time was available.
Respondent (TROY LAMBERT)
According to Mr. Herstoff, respondent contends that the court misled Mr. Lambert about his rights.
What happened at oral argument
Oral argument began at 10:11 a.m.
According to Justice Alito, justice Alito stated that if there's a Martian invasion, there would be an exception for that.
Justice Kagan asked what the district court meant when it set the motion for reconsideration.
Justice Kavanaugh asked how this situation differs from a local rule that is longer than 14 days.
Justice Sotomayor asked whether the party had told the judge it intended to file a motion for leave to appeal.
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- 77464c009a80fa7c666c-r1-61d8ad0981147300.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 26, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.