Filed: Nov. 05, 2014
Latest Update: Nov. 05, 2014
Summary: ORDER VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ COVINGTON, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court pursuant to Plaintiff Lori Shamblin's Amended Motion for Class Certification (Doc. # 120), which was filed on September 23, 2014. Defendant New Partners Consulting, Inc. filed a Response to the Motion on September 25, 2014. (Doc. # 123). For the reasons stated below, the Court denies the Motion without prejudice. Discussion On September 19, 2013, Shamblin filed this putative class action case alleging
Summary: ORDER VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ COVINGTON, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court pursuant to Plaintiff Lori Shamblin's Amended Motion for Class Certification (Doc. # 120), which was filed on September 23, 2014. Defendant New Partners Consulting, Inc. filed a Response to the Motion on September 25, 2014. (Doc. # 123). For the reasons stated below, the Court denies the Motion without prejudice. Discussion On September 19, 2013, Shamblin filed this putative class action case alleging ..
More
ORDER
VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ COVINGTON, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court pursuant to Plaintiff Lori Shamblin's Amended Motion for Class Certification (Doc. # 120), which was filed on September 23, 2014. Defendant New Partners Consulting, Inc. filed a Response to the Motion on September 25, 2014. (Doc. # 123). For the reasons stated below, the Court denies the Motion without prejudice.
Discussion
On September 19, 2013, Shamblin filed this putative class action case alleging that Obama for America violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA"), 47 U.S.C. § 227, during the 2012 presidential election. (Doc. # 1). On September 20, 2013, Shamblin filed her Motion for Class Certification. (Doc. # 5). Rather than analyzing the merits of class certification under the rubric set forth in Rule 23, Fed. R. Civ. P., Shamblin requested an Order staying consideration of the Motion "until such time as Shamblin has the opportunity to conduct discovery with respect to the specific elements of Rule 23, and to set a deadline by which Shamblin shall file her memorandum of points and authorities in support of this motion." (Doc. # 5 at 2).1 On October 9, 2013, the Court entered an Order denying without prejudice Shamblin's Motion to Certify Class. (Doc. # 13).
On January 14, 2014, the Court entered the Case Management and Scheduling Order. (Doc. # 43). Thereafter, on February 11, 2014, the Court entered the Amended Case Management and Scheduling Order, which directed Shamblin to file her Motion to Certify Class, if at all, by June 19, 2014. (Doc. # 49). On April 22, 2014, Shamblin moved to amend the Complaint to add DNC Services Corporation as a Defendant to this action. (Doc. # 74). This Court granted Shamblin's Motion and directed her to file her Amended Complaint by June 4, 2014. (Doc. # 86). On June 17, 2014, a Second Amended Case Management and Scheduling Order was entered, which set forth the requirement that Shamblin file her Motion to Certify Class, if at all, by November 17, 2014. (Doc. # 97). Subsequently, Shamblin filed her Second Amended Complaint on August 14, 2014, adding New Partners Consulting, LLC as a Defendant to this action. (Doc. # 109).
In the Second Amended Complaint, Shamblin alleges that:
[D]espite the prohibition of robocalls to cell phones, and the FCC's reminder that such calls are illegal, President Obama's principal campaign committee, Defendant Obama for America, with the assistance and participation of Defendant DNC Services Corporation . . . and New Partners Consulting, Inc., called voter cell phones with both auto-dialed and pre-recorded calls urging the recipients to vote for Barack Obama in the 2012 presidential election.
(Id. at ¶ 2). Shamblin contends that Defendants violated the TCPA, "by calling voters' cell phones with auto-dialed calls and pre-recorded messages." (Id. at ¶ 21). Specifically, Shamblin contends, "beginning in September 2012 and continuing up to the November 2012 election, Defendants initiated unsolicited auto-dialed telephone calls to Shamblin's cellular telephone number. When Shamblin did not answer the call, Defendants' pre-recorded message was left on her cellular telephone's voice mail system." (Id. at ¶ 22).
Shamblin "is informed and believes that the phone number was assigned to Obama for America Florida, which was a project of the DNC that made and/or paid for calls using outside vendors such as New Partners Consulting, Inc." (Id. at ¶ 24). Shamblin further indicates that she "had not given Defendants her express consent to call her cell phone with automatically-dialed or pre-recorded messages. She had never given Defendants her telephone number and, prior to receiving Defendants' messages, had never even heard of Obama for America." (Id. at ¶ 25).
New Partners Consulting, Inc. responded to the Second Amended Class Action Complaint on September 10, 2014, by filing an Answer and Affirmative Defenses. (Doc. # 118). New Partners Consulting, Inc. then filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction on September 25, 2014, which this Court has denied. (Doc. # 139).
The Court notes that Shamblin filed this Amended Motion for Class Certification in the abundance of caution, while Defendant New Partners Consulting, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss was pending, as a "placeholder." (Doc. # 120). Rather than deferring its ruling on the present Motion, which is six pages in length and devoid of substantive analysis, the Court finds the better course of action is to deny the Motion without prejudice. Shamblin shall file, if at all, her substantive Motion to Certify Class by November 17, 2014, in accordance with the Second Amended Case Management and Scheduling Order.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
Plaintiff Lori Shamblin's Amended Motion for Class Certification (Doc. # 120) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
DONE and ORDERED.
