Floyd

Floyd v. Saratoga Diagnostics, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 20, 20223:20-cv-01520California326 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 LOUIS FLOYD, Case No. 20-cv-01520-MMC

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS' v. MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT;

VACATING HEARING DATE;

SARATOGA DIAGNOSTICS, INC., et DIRECTIONS TO CLERK al., 11 Defendants.

12 Before the Court is plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment, filed November 30, 2021. Defendants have not filed a response thereto. Having read and considered the papers filed in support of the motion, the Court deems the matter appropriate for determination on the papers filed in support of the motion, VACATES the hearing scheduled for March 10, 2022, and rules as follows: 1. To the extent plaintiff seeks an award of $500 in statutory damages under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA"), as well an award of costs, the motion, for the reasons stated by plaintiff (see Pl.'s Mot. at 8:15-12:17, 13:11-14:17), is hereby GRANTED. 2. To the extent…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.