Is Rule 23(c)(2) mandatory notification of a class before a final judgment has been rendered on the merits?

Although the history, purpose, and language of Rule 23(c)(2) indicate that it only contemplates notification of the class before a final judgment has been rendered on the merits, defendants maintain that this court's per curiam decision in Manasen v. California Dental Services, 638 F.2d 1152 (9th Cir.1979), compelled the district court to grant the defendants' motion to send notice to the class even after it rendered its judgment. ² In effect, defendants urge us to extend the mandatory notice requirement of Rule 23(c)(2) to cases in which summary judgment has already been granted on the defendant's own motion. We decline to do so.