For data privacy litigations filed in state court, one strategic option that should be considered by defense counsel is whether the case can (and should) be removed to federal court.  When a plaintiff asserts a claim under federal law, removal to federal court may be based on federal question jurisdiction.  Straightforward, right?

Well, what about

As you will recall from CPW’s prior update (here), earlier this fall, the CFPB issued a final rule (the “Rule”) to implement the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”).  12 CFR Part 1006 et seq.  The Rule is perhaps the most significant development affecting the debt collection industry since the FDCPA came

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) issued last week a final rule to implement the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), in a sea change for consumer privacy and debt collection.  12 CFR Part 1006 et seq.  The Final Rule is the most significant development affecting the debt collection industry since the FDCPA came into

A recent decision from the District of New Jersey recently added to a growing court split about what was required for a plaintiff to establish Article III standing in the context of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) litigation.  Given the plaintiff-bar friendly ruling, more litigation (including more putative class action litigation) can be expected

In Reyes v. Ic Sys., No. 3:19-cv-01206 (JAM), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114206 (D. Conn. June 29, 2020), a federal district court in Connecticut denied Defendant IC System, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) motion to dismiss because Plaintiff Paul Reyes (“Plaintiff”) adequately stated a claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). Previously, the court had