Class certification; FedRCivP 23(b)(3); Whether the class members had standing; Breach of contract as a “concrete injury” for standing purposes; Whether undergoing appraisals mooted their claims; Whether the putative class satisfied the Rule 23(a) requirements; Whether the named plaintiff’s claims were “typical” of the class; Adequate class representative; “Predominance” prong of Rule 23(b)(3); Superiority; Rule 23’s implicit “ascertainability” requirement

In an order on petition for rehearing en banc, a majority of the judges in regular active service voted for rehearing en banc of this case, vacating the previous opinion and judgment (see eJournal #84495 in the 10/20/25 edition), staying the mandate, and restoring the case on the docket as a pending appeal.