In re Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, Telephone Consumer Protection Act Litigation, 11md02295 JAH-BGS. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20191101b85
Visitors: 13
Filed: Oct. 25, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 25, 2019
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING [Doc. No. 770] JOHN A. HOUSTON , District Judge . Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File a Reply to Supplemental Authority re: Marks (Dkt. No. 770). Plaintiffs seek to file a reply addressing (1) whether Plaintiffs' arguments regarding Satterfield v. Simon & Schuster, Inc. , 569 F.3d 946 (9th Cir. 2009) apply equally to the Ninth Circuit's decision in Flores v. Adir Int'l, LLC , 685 Fed. Appx. 533 (9th
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING [Doc. No. 770] JOHN A. HOUSTON , District Judge . Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File a Reply to Supplemental Authority re: Marks (Dkt. No. 770). Plaintiffs seek to file a reply addressing (1) whether Plaintiffs' arguments regarding Satterfield v. Simon & Schuster, Inc. , 569 F.3d 946 (9th Cir. 2009) apply equally to the Ninth Circuit's decision in Flores v. Adir Int'l, LLC , 685 Fed. Appx. 533 (9th ..
More
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING [Doc. No. 770]
JOHN A. HOUSTON, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File a Reply to Supplemental Authority re: Marks (Dkt. No. 770). Plaintiffs seek to file a reply addressing (1) whether Plaintiffs' arguments regarding Satterfield v. Simon & Schuster, Inc., 569 F.3d 946 (9th Cir. 2009) apply equally to the Ninth Circuit's decision in Flores v. Adir Int'l, LLC, 685 Fed. Appx. 533 (9th Cir. 2017); and whether Marks v. Crunch San Diego, LLC, 904 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 2018) applies to calls made before the Marks decision in September of 2018. Defendant opposes the motion. In the event the Court grants the motion, Defendant requests both parties be provided the opportunity to submit a reply.
The Court finds the additional briefing may help to guide the Court in its determination of the pending motions for summary judgment. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1. Plaintiffs' motion is GRANTED;
2. The parties shall file their reply briefs on or before November 4, 2019.
Source: Leagle
