In In re Safeco Insurance Company of America (October 2009), the Seventh Circuit affirmed the lower court’s remand of a class action filed prior to but certified after the enactment of the CAFA. The case was filed in Illinois state court prior to CAFA for alleged underpayments of insurance claims. After the Illinois court certified a class with a new class definition that for the first time included the claims of insureds who were issued policies by non-party affiliates of the defendants, the defendants claimed that the certification commenced a “new action” and removed the case to federal court under CAFA. The defendants argued that the inclusion in the new class definition of claims made by insureds of the affiliates added new causes of action that did not relate back to the original complaint. The defendants further argued that certification had created a new action because it had expanded the scope of their potential liability. The district court remanded the case, and the Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding that CAFA did not apply because the new claims did, in fact, relate back to the original pre-CAFA complaint. The Seventh Circuit explained that “the essential inquiry is whether the original pleading furnishes the defendant with notice of the events that underlie the new contention.” The court held that here, the original complaint contained adequate information to place the defendants on notice that they faced potential liability for their use of a specific claims-processing system, regardless of which affiliate issued the policy under which the claims at issue were made. Because the defendants knew or should have known from the original complaint of the potential for expanded exposure, the “workaday changes” to the class definition did “not create new litigation for CAFA purposes.”