Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-05914/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-05914-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMIE MADRIGAL MENDEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

C-TWO GROUP, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-05914-HSG 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S 

MOTION TO CERTIFY CLASS

Re: Dkt. No. 64

On May 28, 2015, the Court held a hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Certify Class (Dkt. No. 

64). At the hearing, the Court expressed its view that the central arguments presented in 

opposition to Plaintiff’s class certification motion actually address merits questions most 

appropriately decided on a dispositive motion. Specifically, the Court noted that Defendants’ 

claim that Plaintiff and the other putative class members consented to receiving text messages by 

entering their information on the Infusion Lounge website is likely subject to resolution on a classwide basis. The Court urged the parties to be prepared to frame this issue for decision as promptly 

as possible if a class were to be certified.

With regard to the class certification motion, as indicated at the hearing, the Court finds

that Plaintiff has met her burden under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, and thus GRANTS the 

Motion to Certify Class. The Court certifies the following class: All individuals who entered their 

contact information online through Infusion Lounge’s website and were sent a text message from 

SMS Short Code 99158 that referenced the Infusion Lounge from November 5, 2009 through 

October 15, 2013. See Reply at 1 (Dkt. No. 72). The Court will issue a written order setting out 

its analysis of the Rule 23 factors as soon as practicable. 

Within seven days of this Order, the parties shall meet and confer and jointly file a 

Case 4:13-cv-05914-HSG Document 75 Filed 06/02/15 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

proposed case schedule. The schedule should include fact and expert discovery deadlines and a 

dispositive motion briefing schedule, including a deadline for the motion to be heard. Based on 

the Court’s discussion with the parties at the hearing, the Court anticipates that a dispositive 

motion focused on this consent issue should be able to be filed within approximately two months 

of the issuance of this order (i.e., by August 6, 2015).

In addition, the parties shall also submit a proposed protective order that tracks the 

Northern District of California’s Model Stipulated Protective Order for Standard Litigation, or 

explain the basis for any requested deviations from the Model Order, as required by this Court’s 

May 3, 2015 Order (Dkt. No. 62). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

______________________________________

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

6/2/2015

Case 4:13-cv-05914-HSG Document 75 Filed 06/02/15 Page 2 of 2