The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying class certification in this wage and hour case. Insofar as plaintiff claimed that the employer’s rounding of hours worked was illegal, the trial court properly found that noncommon issues predominated because it had no single rounding policy but left matters up to managers at its different locations. Plaintiff’s theory that lack of a written policy regarding rounding in and of itself violated California law was unsupported by authority. Similarly, class certification was not required on plaintiff’s meal and rest break claims. Lack of a uniform meal and rest break policy did not in itself establish liability, and individual questions predominated due to different practices at the defendant’s different branch locations.