Marcotte
Marcotte v. General Electric Capital Services, Inc.
Opinion
Opinion
Moskowitz, J.
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
Defendant GE Money Bank, FSB (“GEMB”) has filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Doc. 54]. Plaintiff has also filed an Ex-Parte Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order [Doc. 60]. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and DENIES as moot Plaintiffs Ex-Parte Motion..
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff allegedly owes Defendants a consumer debt. In early 2008, Plaintiff retained the Doan Law Firm to help him resolve his debts and file for bankruptcy. The Doan Firm sent Defendants a letter in January 2008, telling Defendants that the firm represented Plaintiff and to send all future communications to the firm. But in April and May of 2008, Defendants sent Plaintiff two billing statements. Plaintiff claims that by sending these two statements, Defendants violated the California Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“CFDCPA”), which prohibits certain communications by creditors to debtors represented by counsel.
II. LEGAL STANDARD
The same standard governs both Rule 12(c) motions for judgment on the pleadings and Rule 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss. Dworkin v. Hustler Magazine,…