Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): equitable-relief claims and that certification under Rule 23(b)(2) is proper. Following the lead of the many other courts who have considered the issue, the Court will also certify Plaintiffs’ FDCPA statutory-damages claims under (b)(2). Ac cording to Cheek & Zeehandelar, its net worth as of August 24, 2006, was $283,900.17. The FDCPA permits successful plaintiffs to recover statutory damages equal to $500,000 or one percent of the debt collector’s net worth. Assuming that the class consists of just the 1,236 people for whom Cheek & Zeehandelar has produced garnishment affidavits, and assuming also that Plaintiffs prevail in this litigation, each class member would be entitled to receive approximately $2.30 each. Abels v. JBC Legal Group, P.C., 227 F.R.D. 541, 546-47 (N.D.Cal.2005) (<HOLDING>). Finally, this Court would be remiss were it 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that fdcpa statutory damages did not predominate over the requested equitable relief because given the defendants net worth and the number of class members each class member would be entitled to receive only 025 in statutory damages (B) holding that because the defendant has the right to litigate the issue of each class members consent the trial court did not improperly exercise its discretion in finding that these issues would predominate over common questions (C) holding that rule 23b2 calls for injunction as to all class members or to none of them and does not authorize class certification when each class member would be entitled to an individualized award of monetary damages (D) holding that a class plaintiff who seeks to assert statutory rights to protect a class of which he is a member is not asserting rights antagonistic to any members of that class (E) recognizing a narrow class of cases in which the termination of the class representatives claim for relief does not moot the claims of the class members
Output (English): holding that because the defendant has the right to litigate the issue of each class members consent the trial court did not improperly exercise its discretion in finding that these issues would predominate over common questions