In the Wal-Mart v. Dukes case, the Supreme Court denied the magnificence movement primarily because the plaintiffs did not meet the commonality requirement. The Court held that the plaintiff’s claims have been too numerous and individualized to continue as a magnificence, mainly given the decentralized nature of Wal-Mart policies. This ruling bolstered the significance of demonstrating that there was no unusual place in prison or genuine problems while searching for magnificence certification, and it drastically impacted destiny magnificence-movement lawsuits, particularly those geared toward complex, large, complicated companies.