LoanDepot Answers TCPA Complaint With Battery of Defensive Motions
Defendant loanDepot answered plaintiff Zachary Sawicki’s allegations it violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and Florida Telephone Solicitation Act (see 2301170005) with a series of motions Friday to dismiss his complaint, to strike his class allegations, to stay discovery and…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
to bifurcate discovery. Sawicki doesn’t allege he used his number for residential purposes and he failed to allege he personally listed his number on the national do not call registry, said the motion to dismiss (docket 2:22-cv-14425) in U.S. District Court for Southern Florida in Fort Pierce. Sawicki can’t satisfy the requirements of Rule 23 involving the alleged classes “because the proposed classes, which are based on imprecise and vague criteria, are facially deficient and uncertifiable,” said its motion to strike his class allegations. In its motion to stay discovery, loanDepot argued that resolution of the motions to dismiss and to strike the class allegations “will dispose of or substantially narrow the scope of claims in this action.” Its motion to bifurcate discovery said the court should do discovery in three phases to “conserve party and judicial resources,” and more effectively manage the litigation. Phase one would be discovery into Sawicki’s individual claims, while the second would be discovery “into the appropriateness of class certification” if his claims proceed, it said. If a class is ultimately certified, the third phase would be merits discovery for the class, it said.