Menzel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 PETER MENZEL, Case No. 17-cv-05499-EMC

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S

v. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

OR CERTIFICATION

SCHOLASTIC, INC., Docket No. 139 Defendant.

12 13 Scholastic has moved for reconsideration or, in the alternative, for certification for an interlocutory appeal. Having considered the parties’ briefs, the Court hereby DENIES Scholastic’s motion. With respect to the motion to reconsider, Rotkiske v. Klemm, 205 L. Ed. 2d 291 (2019), is not directly on point as it concerns the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and not the Copyright Act. Notably, the language used in the FDCPA (concerning the statute of limitations) is different from that used in the Copyright Act. Compare 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d) (in the FDCPA, providing that an action “may be brought in any appropriate United States district court without regard to the amount in controversy, or in any other court of competent jurisdiction,…