1 Case :-cv-00-bas-blm Document Filed 0// Page of 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JORDAN MARKS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Plaintiff, CRUNCH SAN DIEGO, LLC, Defendant. Case No. -cv-00-bas-blm ORDER:. GRANTING DEFENDANT S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF ). TERMINATING DEFENDANT S MOTION TO EXCLUDE THE OPINIONS AND TESTIMONY OF JEFFREY HANSEN AS MOOT (ECF ) On April, Defendant Crunch San Diego, LLC brought a Motion for Summary Judgment. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendant s motion. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Defendant Crunch San Diego, LLC ( Crunch ) operates gyms in San Diego, California, as well as in several other states. Compl., ECF. Plaintiff Jordan Marks entered into a contractual relationship with Crunch sometime before -cv-00-bas-blm
2 Case :-cv-00-bas-blm Document Filed 0// Page of 0 November,. Id. Crunch uses a third-party web-based platform administrated by Textmunication to send promotional text messages to its members and prospective customers cell phones. Def. s Mot. Summ. J. :, ECF. The phone numbers are inputted into the platform by one of three methods: () when Crunch or another authorized person manually uploads a phone number onto the platform; () when an individual responds to a Crunch marketing campaign via text message (a call to action ); and () when an individual manually inputs the phone number on a consent form through Crunch s website that interfaces with Textmunication s platform. Aesefi Decl., ECF -. Users of the platform, including Crunch, select the desired phone numbers, generate a message to be sent, select the date the message will be sent, and then the platform sends the text messages to those phone numbers on that date. Mot. Summ. J. :. The system then stores these numbers in case the user wants to notify the prospective customer or member of a later offer. Aesefi Dep. :, June,, ECF -. On the specified date the platform sends the message to a Short Messaging Service ( SMS ) gateway aggregator that then transmits the message directly to the cell phone carrier. Ex., Pl. s Opp n., ECF -. Marks alleges he received three unwanted text messages from Crunch between November,, and October,. Pl. s Opp n. :, ECF. This Motion for Summary Judgment turns upon the issue of whether or not the platform used by Crunch may be classified as an Automated Telephone Dialing System ( ATDS ). LEGAL STANDARD Summary judgment is appropriate on all or any part of a claim if there is an absence of a genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. ; see also Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, U.S., () ( Celotex ). A fact is material when, under the SMS is a standardized protocol for sending short text messages to cellular phones. -cv-00-bas-blm
3 Case :-cv-00-bas-blm Document Filed 0// Page of 0 governing substantive law, the fact could affect the outcome of the case. See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., U.S., (); see also Freeman v. Arpaio, F.d, (th Cir. ). A dispute about a material fact is genuine if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party. Anderson, U.S. at. One of the principal purposes of Rule is to dispose of factually unsupported claims or defenses. See Celotex, U.S. at. The moving party bears the initial burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. See Celotex, U.S. at. The burden then shifts to the nonmoving party to establish, beyond the pleadings, that there is a genuine issue for trial. Miller v. Glenn Miller Prods., Inc., F.d, (th Cir. 0) (citing Celotex, U.S. at ). A genuine issue at trial cannot be based on disputes over irrelevant or unnecessary facts[.] See T.W. Elec. Serv., Inc. v. Pacific Elec. Contractors Ass'n, 0 F.d, 0 (th Cir. ). Similarly, [t]he mere existence of a scintilla of evidence in support of the nonmoving party's position is not sufficient. Triton Energy Corp. v. Square D. Co., F.d, (th Cir. ) (citing Anderson, U.S. at ). The party opposing summary judgment must by [his or her] own affidavits, or by the depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, designate specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. Celotex, U.S. at (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P (e)). That party cannot rest upon the mere allegations or denials of [his or her] pleadings. Fed.R.Civ.P. (e). When making its determination, the Court must view all inferences drawn from the underlying facts in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. See See also Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corp., U.S., () (if the moving party meets this initial burden, the nonmoving party cannot defeat summary judgment by merely demonstrating that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts ). -cv-00-bas-blm
4 Case :-cv-00-bas-blm Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corp., U.S., (). Credibility determinations, the weighing of evidence, and the drawing of legitimate inferences from the facts are jury functions, not those of a judge, [when] he [or she] is ruling on a motion for summary judgment. Anderson, U.S. at. DISCUSSION. The undisputed facts show that Defendant did not use an ATDS to send text messages. Defendant argues that the platform it uses to send promotional text messages is not an ATDS as defined by U.S.C. (a) of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ( TCPA ) because it lacks the capacity to store or produce telephone numbers to be called using a random or sequential number generator. Mot. Summ. J. :. If Defendant s system is not an ATDS, The TCPA does not apply and summary judgment should be granted, dismissing all TCPA causes of action with prejudice. The Court finds that Defendant s system does not incorporate an ATDS. An ATDS is equipment that has the capacity (A) to store or produce numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and (B) to dial such numbers. TCPA, (a)() (). The Federal Communications Commission ( FCC ) does not have the statutory authority to change the TCPA s definition of an ATDS. The statute defines an ATDS in (a)(). Section (a), in contrast to (b) and (c), does not include a provision giving the FCC rulemaking authority. Compare id. with (b)() and (c)(). Furthermore, (b) and (c) expressly limit the aforementioned rulemaking authority to only those subsections. It is therefore Unless otherwise stated, all further statutory citations are to U.S.C. Section (b)() provides that the [Federal Communications] Commission shall prescribe regulations to implement the requirements of this subsection. Section (c)() provides that the -cv-00-bas-blm
5 Case :-cv-00-bas-blm Document Filed 0// Page of 0 undeniable that any FCC attempt to modify the statutory language of (a) is impermissible. The FCC itself adheres to this, using the statutory definition of ATDS in their regulations. See, e.g., C.F.R..0(f)(). Even so, the FCC has issued commentary interpreting the definition of ATDS broadly as any equipment that has the specified capacity to generate numbers and dial them without human intervention regardless of whether the numbers called are randomly or sequentially generated or come from calling lists. In the Matter of Rules and Regulations Implementing the Tel. Consumer Prot. Act of F.C.C.R., n. () (emphasis in original). However, this interpretation does not bind the courts. In Satterfield v. Simon & Schuster, Inc., the Ninth Circuit found the definition of an ATDS clear and unambiguous. F.d, (th Cir. 0). Because it is clear and unambiguous, the FCC s 0 statutory interpretation of an ATDS is not binding on the Court. Id.; See Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., U.S. (). Further, the FCC s definition is not predicated on the plain language of the statute, but is instead based on policy considerations. Courts have defined capacity in the context of an ATDS as the system s present, not potential, capacity to store, produce, or call randomly or sequentially generated telephone numbers. Gragg v. Orange Cab Co., F.Supp.d, (W.D. Wash. ) (emphasis in original). The Gragg court expressed concerns that focusing on potential capacity would encompass many modern Commission shall conclude the rulemaking proceeding initiated under paragraph () [of section (c)] and shall prescribe regulations to implement methods and procedures for protecting the privacy rights described in such paragraph. Even if the interpretation was binding or convincing, the FCC s interpretation dealt with predictive dialers and not third-party text messaging platforms like the one at issue here. See In the Matter of Rules and Regulations Implementing the Tel. Consumer Prot. Act of, F.C.C.R. 0, 0 (0). The portions of the FCC s decisions in 0 and that Plaintiff cites to both refer back to the 0 FCC sections regarding predictive dialers. E.g., In the Matter of Rules and Regulations Implementing the Tel. Consumer Prot. Act of F.C.C.R., (0); In the Matter of Rules and Regulations Implementing the Tel. Consumer Prot. Act of F.C.C.R., n. (). -cv-00-bas-blm
6 Case :-cv-00-bas-blm Document Filed 0// Page of 0 devices and potentially subject all smartphone and computer users to the TCPA, which would be an absurd result. Id. Because these modern-day devices are easily programmable, anyone who uses a computer or smartphone would be subject to the TCPA. Id. It seems unlikely that Congress intended to subject such a wide swath of the population to a law designed to combat unwanted and excessive telemarketing. Additionally, Gragg clarified that sequentially generated telephone numbers are those that are numerically sequential, such as () -, () -, and so forth. Id. Random or sequential number generator cannot reasonably refer broadly to any list of numbers dialed in random or sequential order, as this would effectively nullify the entire clause. If the statute meant to only require that an ATDS include any list or database of numbers, it would simply define an ATDS as a system with the capacity to store or produce numbers to be called ; random or sequential number generator would be rendered superfluous. This phrase s inclusion requires it to have some limiting effect. When a court construes a statute it should, if possible, do so as to prevent any clause, sentence, or word, from being superfluous or insignificant. Alaska Dep t of Envtl. Conservation v. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 0 U.S., n. (0); Cooper Indus., Inc., v. Aviall Services Inc., U.S., (0) (courts are loathe to render part of a statute superfluous). It therefore naturally follows that random or sequential number generator refers to the genesis of the list of numbers, not to an interpretation that renders number generator synonymous with order to be called. The platform used by Defendant does not have the present capacity to store or produce numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator, It is even more concerning that under the FCC s interpretation, any phone featuring a built-in phonebook could have the present capacity to qualify as an ATDS. Any device permitting a person to initiate an SMS or voice call from a database without actually dialing the number itself arguably has the capacity to store or produce numbers and dial those numbers [...] from a database of numbers. F.C.C.R. 0, 0 (0). -cv-00-bas-blm
7 Case :-cv-00-bas-blm Document Filed 0// Page of 0 and to dial those numbers. Numbers only enter the system through one of the three methods listed above, and all three methods require human curation and intervention. None could reasonably be termed a random or sequential number generator. Mot. Summ. J. :. Thus, because the Textmunication platform lacks a random or sequential number generator, it is not currently an ATDS. Undisputed facts show that the system also fails to have the potential capacity to become an ATDS. In Sherman v. Yahoo! Inc., the court found a similar SMS system to be an ATDS because Yahoo! could potentially write new software code adding a sequential or number generator to the system. F.Supp.d, (S.D. Cal. ). In contrast, here Defendant uses a third-party platform that audits its user s accounts pursuant to an Anti-Spam Policy. Aesefi Dep. 0:. Textmunication explicitly bans inputting numbers into its system without either a response to a call to action or written consent. Aesefi Dep. :. Therefore the undisputed material facts show that even if potential or future capacity is fairly included in the definition of ATDS, Defendant s contractual obligations preclude such a finding in this case. Because Defendant s access to the platform is limited, it similarly lacks the future or potential capacity to become an ATDS. The Ninth Circuit, in Meyer v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs. LLC., deferred to the FCC and found a predictive dialer to be an ATDS because it has the capacity to dial numbers without human intervention. F.d, 0 (th Cir. ) (quoting F.C.C.R. 0, 0 (0)) (emphasis in original). The court noted that a predictive dialer is equipment that dials numbers and, when certain computer software is attached, also assists telemarketers in predicting when a sales agent will be available to take calls. The hardware, when paired with certain software, has the capacity to store or produce numbers and dial those numbers at random, in sequential order, or from a database of numbers. Meyer, F.d The 0 FCC Report & Order describes predictive dialers. In most cases, telemarketers program the numbers to be called into the equipment, and the dialer calls them at a rate to ensure -cv-00-bas-blm
8 Case :-cv-00-bas-blm Document Filed 0// Page of 0 at 0 (quoting F.C.C.R. 0, 0 (0)). In Meyer, challenges to the FCC s authority to interpret the statute were waived because they were not raised at the district court level. Meyer, 0 F.d at 0. Here, the Court is able to address the argument and has addressed its merits. The Court finds that the FCC has no authority to modify or definitively interpret any language in (a) of the TCPA. Even though this Court finds the FCC s unauthorized interpretation of an ATDS overly broad, the system present here is factually distinct from the system described in the FCC comment. Predictive dialers use an algorithm to predict when a telemarketer will become available to take a call, effectively queueing callers for the telemarketer. They are neither the database storing the numbers nor a number generator creating an ephemeral queue of numbers. However, database or number generator software is frequently attached to automatic dialers, thereby creating the potential capacity to become an ATDS. Here, there is no potential that the system could be modified to include a random or sequential number generator, and it therefore does not qualify under Meyer.. Defendant s motion to exclude the opinions and testimony of Jeffery Hansen is moot. As in any matter before the Court on summary judgment, the Court first determines if there is a dispute of material fact. If not, the Court applies the law to the undisputed facts and may grant or deny summary judgment. Here, expert testimony opining on legal questions is irrelevant and therefore not a basis for this that when a consumer answers the phone, a sales person is available to take the call. The principal feature of predictive dialing software is a timing function, not number storage or generation. These machines are not conceptually different from dialing machines without the predictive computer program attached. F.C.C.R. 0, 0 (0). This Court concurs with the Gragg court that the statutory interpretation suggested by the FCC is both underinclusive and overinclusive and should not be relied upon by courts. It is overinclusive because any cellular phone with group messaging or conference call features has the present capacity to dial multiple numbers from a database, either as text messages or voice calls. It is underinclusive because systems could be artfully developed to circumvent the FCC s comment. -cv-00-bas-blm
9 Case :-cv-00-bas-blm Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Court s ruling. Expert opinions are only relevant on a motion for summary judgment if it helps determine the existence of a dispute of material fact, a situation not present here. See Celotex, U.S. at. Accordingly, because the Court did not take into account the expert declaration, Defendant s motion to exclude the declaration of Jeffrey Hanson is TERMINATED AS MOOT. CONCLUSION Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendant s Motion for Summary Judgment and TERMINATES Defendant s Motion to Exclude the Opinions and Testimony of Jeffery Hansen as MOOT. The Court DISMISSES this matter in its entirety WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October, -cv-00-bas-blm
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BRIAN GLAUSER, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff, No. C - PJH 1 1 1 1 1 v. ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY
Case: 1:10-cv-02697 Document #: 65 Filed: 08/16/11 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:659 10-2697.111-RSK August 16, 2011 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ROSLYN
Only the Westlaw citation is currently available. United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Seattle. Torrey GRAGG, on his own behalf and on behalf of similarly situated persons, Plaintiff, v. ORANGE
Walker v. Transworld Systems, Inc. Doc. 35 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION NEVADA WALKER, Plaintiff, v. Case No: 8:14-cv-588-T-30MAP TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION JAMES D. FOWLER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No.: 08-cv-2785 ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Judge Robert M. Dow,
Case: 1:10-cv-00117 Document #: 114 Filed: 11/08/10 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:1538 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION BRIANNA GREENE, on behalf of ) herself and others
Case 4:13-cv-01104 Document 40 Filed in TXSD on 02/26/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION SHARON JACKSON, et al. Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL ACTION H-13-1104
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION EEOC versus BROWN & GROUP RETAIL, INC. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-06-3074 Memorandum and Order Regarding Discovery Motions,
Case 2:04-cv-03428-SRD-ALC Document 29 Filed 08/22/06 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA EDWARD McGARRY, ET AL CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO: 04-3428 TRAVELERS LIFE AND ANNUITY
Case :0-cv-0-SI Document Filed 0/0/0 Page of 0 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA United States District Court For the Northern District of California 0 HYPERTOUCH,
Case 1:07-cv-00389-MJW-BNB Document 51 Filed 08/21/2008 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 07-cv-00389-MJW-BNB ERNA GANSER, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT
Case :-cv-00-mjp Document 0 Filed 0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 0 KENNETH WRIGHT, CASE NO. C- MJP v. Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT S MOTION TO
Main Document Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE CASE NO. 512-bk-03367-RNO STEVEN RICHARD ALECKNA JAIME SUE ALECKNA CHAPTER 7 Debtors ***********************************
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 1 PAUL ELKINS and KATHY ELKINS, husband and wife, v. Plaintiffs, QBE INSURANCE CORPORATION, a foreign insurer; COMMUNITYASSOCIATION
Case 3:12-cv-01348-HZ Document 32 Filed 03/08/13 Page 1 of 8 Page ID#: 144 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION KELLY J. YOX, an individual, v. Plaintiff, No.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CAROSELLA & FERRY, P.C., Plaintiff, v. TIG INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. 00-2344 Memorandum and Order YOHN,
Case 1:11-cv-01397-CAP Document 69 Filed 02/27/13 Page 1 of 10 TAMMY DRUMMONDS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. v. 1:11-CV-1397-CAP
2:09-cv-14271-LPZ-PJK Doc # 13 Filed 06/24/10 Pg 1 of 6 Pg ID 53 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION v. Plaintiff, CASE NO. 09-14271 HON.
The Ninth Circuit Holds That Text Messages Are Subject to a Telemarketing Law By Gonzalo E. Mon Gonzalo E. Mon is an attorney in Kelley Drye & Warren s advertising and marketing law practice. He can be
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION PAM HOWARD and EBEN HOWARD ex rel UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PLAINTIFFS v. No. 4:13CV00310 JLH ARKANSAS CHILDREN S HOSPITAL;
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA EVELYN THOMAS v. COMMUNITY COLLEGE OF PHILADELPHIA CIVIL ACTION NO. 06-5372 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Kauffman, J. April 18, 2008
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND JOAN FALLOWS KLUGE, Plaintiff, v. Civil No. L-10-00022 LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA Defendant. MEMORANDUM Plaintiff, Joan Fallows
Case 2:14-cv-02386-MVL-DEK Document 33 Filed 04/14/15 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA KIRSTEN D'JUVE CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO: 14-2386 AMERICAN MODERN HOME INSURANCE
Case :-cv-0-gmn-njk Document Filed 0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 0 0 VERN ELMER, an individual, vs. Plaintiff, JP MORGAN CHASE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a National Association;
Case 1:13-cv-24473-DPG Document 105 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/30/2015 Page 1 of 9 ATLANTIC CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, vs. Plaintiff, SCALTEC USA CORP., and LEE ELLIS BLUE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8:09-cv-00341-LSC-FG3 Doc # 276 Filed: 07/19/13 Page 1 of 5 - Page ID # 3979 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA MICHAEL S. ARGENYI, Plaintiff, v. CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY, Defendant.
2:08-cv-12533-DPH-PJK Doc # 67 Filed 03/26/13 Pg 1 of 7 Pg ID 2147 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY, v. Plaintiff, MICHIGAN CATASTROPHIC
Case 3:12-cv-01004-JPG-PMF Document 123 Filed 04/11/14 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #2498 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS HAMILTON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL DISTRICT, an Illinois governmental
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND MARYLAND ACCOUNTING SERVICES, INC., et al. Plaintiffs, v. Case No. CCB-11-CV-00145 CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant. MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs
Case 2:06-cv-02026-CM Document 114 Filed 03/10/09 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS ) METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE ) COMPANY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION v.
CASE 0:14-cv-00062-PAM-JSM Document 26 Filed 06/09/14 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Caleb Trainor and Isaac Trainor, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
Case 2:08-cv-03323-BMS Document 17 Filed 08/04/09 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA PATRICIA MAYER, : Plaintiff, : CIVIL ACTION : v. : : CARLOS MASCAREHAS,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, 8:03CV165 Plaintiff, v. WOODMEN OF THE WORLD LIFE INSURANCE SOCIETY and/or OMAHA WOODMEN LIFE INSURANCE
Page 1 STEVEN POLNICKY, Plaintiff, v. LIBERTY LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF BOSTON; WELLS FARGO & COMPANY LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN, Defendants. No. C 13-1478 SI UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION RLI INSURANCE COMPANY, VS. Plaintiff, WILLBROS CONSTRUCTION (U.S.) LLC, et al., Defendants. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-10-4634 MEMORANDUM
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE : CHAPTER 7 AMERICAN REHAB & PHYSICAL : THERAPY, INC. : DEBTOR : CASE NO. 04-14562 ROBERT H. HOLBER, TRUSTEE : PLAINTIFF
Case 3:13-cv-00054 Document 120 Filed in TXSD on 05/04/15 Page 1 of 7 This case is being reviewed for possible publication by American Maritime Cases, Inc. ( AMC ). If this case is published in AMC s book
Case 1:12-cv-06677-JSR Document 77 Filed 09/16/14 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------x EDWARD ZYBURO, on behalf of himself and all
Case 1:08-cv-00225-EJL-CWD Document 34 Filed 03/02/10 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF IDAHO OREGON MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, an Oregon corporation, Plaintiff, Case No.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CONNECTICUT GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION v. No. 96-CV-4598 PATRICIA M. CURRY KELLY, et al., Defendants.
Case 4:06-cv-00191 Document 12 Filed in TXSD on 05/25/06 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION BARBARA S. QUINN, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-06-00191
Case 0:10-cv-00772-PAM-RLE Document 33 Filed 07/13/10 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Ideal Development Corporation, Mike Fogarty, J.W. Sullivan, George Riches, Warren Kleinsasser,
Case 0:15-cv-62026-JIC Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/28/2016 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 15-62026-CIV-COHN/SELTZER S. RYAN STRAUSS, v. Plaintiff,
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION REGINA KUHN, Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT vs. COMFORT HOSPICE CARE, LLC,
Case 0:12-cv-62173-RNS Document 24 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 1 of 5 BRET L. LUSSKIN, JR., vs. Plaintiff, SEMINOLE COMEDY, INC., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case
Case 2:12-cv-02071-SSV-JCW Document 283 Filed 02/26/15 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA XL SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO: 12-2071 BOLLINGER SHIPYARDS,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA THE MANUFACTURERS LIFE CIVIL ACTION INSURANCE COMPANY, SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO NORTH AMERICAN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY NO. 96-4053
Case 14-50028 Doc 30 Filed 03/16/15 EOD 03/16/15 15:59:28 Pg 1 of 8 SO ORDERED: March 16, 2015. Jeffrey J. Graham United States Bankruptcy Judge UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
Case 0:14-cv-62840-JIC Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/30/2015 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY, v. Plaintiff, KELLEY VENTURES, LLC, KEVIN P. KELLEY, and PHOENIX MOTORS, INC.,
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT LACI SATTERFIELD, individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated, No. 07-16356 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. CV-06-02893-CW
Case 7:12-cv-00148-HL Document 43 Filed 11/07/13 Page 1 of 11 CHRISTY LYNN WATFORD, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA VALDOSTA DIVISION v. Plaintiff, Civil Action No.
Case 1:12-cv-01369-JG-VMS Document 37 Filed 10/02/14 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 341 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK FOR ONLINE PUBLICATION TODD C. BANK, MEMORANDUM Plaintiff, AND ORDER
Case 5:13-cv-01237-D Document 49 Filed 02/10/16 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA MART D. GREEN, Trustee of the David and Barbara Green 1993 Dynasty Trust,
Case 2:04-cv-02667-EEF-JCW Document 37 Filed 04/26/06 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA CLYDE CHAMBERS VERSUS CIVIL ACTION NO. 04-2667 SECTION T JOSHUA MARINE, INC.
CASE 0:10-cv-01132-MJD-FLN Document 106 Filed 06/06/11 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA In re: Mirapex Products Liability Litigation 07-MD-1836 (MJD/FLN) This document relates
Case 5:03-cv-00175-DF Document 40 Filed 05/16/05 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION LINDA DENT, : : Plaintiff, : : vs. : 5:03CV175 (DF) :
Case 4:05-cv-00008-JAJ-RAW Document 80 Filed 11/21/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA CENTRAL DIVISION EARL A. POWELL, In the name of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CAROL DEMIZIO AND ANTHONY : CIVIL ACTION DEMIZIO in their own right and as : ADMINISTRATORS OF THE ESTATE : NO. 05-409 OF MATTHEW
The court incorporates by reference in this paragraph and adopts as the findings and orders of this court the document set forth below. This document was signed electronically on November 12, 2008, which
Case 1:06-cv-01892-CKK Document 30 Filed 05/20/08 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COVAD COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 06 1892 (CKK) REVONET,
Case 0:05-cv-02409-DSD-RLE Document 51 Filed 03/16/2006 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Civil No. 05-2409(DSD/RLE) Kristine Forbes (Lamke) and Morgan Koop, Plaintiffs, v.
Case 4:14-cv-00283 Document 10 Filed in TXSD on 07/31/14 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION SELDA SMITH, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION H-14-283 WELLS FARGO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION MELEA LIMITED, a Gibraltar corporation, and PLASTIC MOLDED TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Michigan corporation, Plaintiffs, v. Civil No.
NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA. v. MEAD JOHNSON & COMPANY et al Doc. 324 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA EVANSVILLE DIVISION NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE
Case 3:05-cv-02361-M Document 24 Filed 02/21/07 Page 1 of 8 PageID 623 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION RANDY OLDHAM, Plaintiff, v. No. 3:05-CV-2361-M
Case 4:14-cv-01527 Document 39 Filed in TXSD on 07/08/15 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION CHARTIS SPECIALTY INSURANCE CO., Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND IMPERIUM INSURANCE COMPANY f/k/a DELOS INSURANCE COMPANY v. Civil No. CCB-12-1373 ALLIED INSURANCE BROKERS, INC. MEMORANDUM This suit arises
Case 1:09-cv-21435-MGC Document 208 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/01/2011 Page 1 of 6 E. JENNIFER NEWMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 09-21435-Civ-COOKE/TURNOFF vs. Plaintiff
Case 1:05-cv-00050-GC Document 29 Filed 12/13/05 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 245 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE BUSINESS LENDERS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Civil No. 05-50-B-C RITANNE CAVANAUGH GAZAK,
Molnar et al v. NCO Financial Systems, Inc. Doc. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 JEFFREY MOLNAR, ET AL., v. NCO FINANCIAL SYSTEMS, INC., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiffs, Defendant.
Case 5:10-cv-00044-CAR Document 280 Filed 11/18/11 Page 1 of 14 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION TERRY CARTRETTE TINDALL, : : Plaintiff, : v. : Civil Action
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ERIN T. WASHICHECK, Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER v. 05-C-302-S THE ULTIMATE LTD. and THE ULTIMATE LTD. HEALTH PLAN, Defendants.
2:07-cv-12361-JF-DAS Doc # 18 Filed 03/19/08 Pg 1 of 9 Pg ID 159 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION STACEY MACK, Plaintiff, v. Civil No. 07-12361 Hon. John Feikens
Case :0-cv-0-FDB Document Filed 0/0/0 Page of 0 LOREN A. DEAN, v. Plaintiff, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Defendant. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA INTRODUCTION Case
Department of Health and Human Services DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD Appellate Division In the Case of: The Physicians Hospital in Anadarko, Petitioner, - v. - Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. DATE:
Case: 1:10-cv-08146 Document #: 27 Filed: 06/29/11 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:342 TKK USA INC., f/k/a The Thermos Company, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION Plaintiff,
Case 4:04-cv-00622 Document 43 Filed in TXSD on 04/04/06 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION IRFAN LALANI, Plaintiff, VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-04-0622 TEXAS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN PAUL BROEGE, and THE ESTATE OF STEVEN J. BROEGE, BY PHYLLIS A. BROEGE, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE, Wisconsin Residents, Plaintiffs,
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. No. 96-11134 Summary Calendar. Rosser B. MELTON, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TEACHERS INSURANCE & ANNUITY ASSOCIATION of AMERICA, Defendant- Appellee, United
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a New York insurance company, v. Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION BRENDA D. FLUSTY and BETTY A. KRIDER, Co-Personal
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. MARRON RONALD A. MARRON (SBN 10) firstname.lastname@example.org ALEXIS WOOD (SBN 000) email@example.com KAS GALLUCCI (SBN 0) firstname.lastname@example.org