LG manufactures refrigerators, among other consumer appliances. In 2020, LG discovers a defect with the temperature control unit (TCU) it has used across refrigerator units for the past five years. Specifically, the defective TCUs misread the fridge's internal temperatureunderestimating it by five degrees Fahrenheit. By way of example, the fridge will think the internal temperature is 40 f when the actual internal temperature is 45 f.

Note two things: first, the colder that food is kept, the longer it will avoid spoilage; second, the risk of food-borne illness increases dramatically when food is stored above 40 f.

Over the past five years, LG has sold 800,000 fridges with the defective TCUs. A group of LG fridge owners learns about the defect and files a putative class action against LG, and they allege breach of warranty, fraudulent misrepresentation, and deceptive and unfair trade practices. The plaintiffs have two theories of recovery: First, due to the defective TCU, food in their fridges has spoiled at an increased frequency and severity, causing them monetary damages of potentially hundreds of dollars across the past five years. Second, the plaintiffs claim that at least some owners have suffered food-borne illness due to the defective TCUs.

The plaintiffs move for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) on both basesthe spoilage class and the illness class. LG opposes both class certifications by arguing that the plaintiffs have failed to satisfy the requirements of Rule 23.

Assume you're a district judge in the Ninth Circuit, and you're overseeing this case. The motion for class certifications is ripe for adjudication. How do you rule on the spoilage class? How do you rule on the illness class? If you were instead a district judge in the Seventh Circuit, would either or both of your answers change? Explain why or why not.