Pascal

I. INTRODUCTION

15 Plaintiff Lawrence Pascal brings a putative class action against Defendant Concentra, Inc. 16 (“Concentra”) under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. § 227. 17 Presently before the Court is Concentra’s Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint 18 Pursuant to FRCP Rule 12(b)(6), for a More Definite Statement Pursuant to FRCP Rule 12(e) and 19 to Strike Pursuant to Rule 12(f)/ 23(c)(1)(A) (“Motion”). The Court finds that the Motion can be 20 decided without a hearing and therefore vacates the Motion hearing set for September 4, 2020 at 21 9:30 pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b). For the reasons stated below, the Motion is DENIED.1

II. BACKGROUND

23 Over a year ago, Concentra brought a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended 24 Complaint (“FAC”). See Dkt No. 13. On August 20, 2019, the Court granted the motion as to 25 Concentra’s request for attorneys’ fees but rejected Concentra’s other challenges, finding that 26 27 Plaintiff stated a viable claim under the TCPA and declining to strike from the class definition individuals who do not reside in California. Dkt. No. 19. Concentra filed an answer to the FAC …