1

BARSHAY SANDERS, PLLC

100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500

Garden City, New York 11530

Tel: (516) 203-7600

Fax: (516) 706-5055

Email: ConsumerRights@BarshaySanders.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Our File No.: 118882

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN DIVISION

Lynette Rogers,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Second Round, L.P.,

Defendant.

Case No: 

COMPLAINT

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Lynette Rogers (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”), by and through the undersigned 

counsel, complains, states and alleges against Second Round, L.P. (hereinafter referred to as 

“Defendant”), as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. This action seeks to recover for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 

15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. (the “FDCPA”).

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. This Court has federal subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 

15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d). 

3. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because a substantial part of the events 

or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this Judicial District. 

Case 1:20-cv-00426-RP Document 1 Filed 04/22/20 Page 1 of 10
2

4. At all relevant times, Defendant conducted business within the State of Texas.

PARTIES

5. Plaintiff Lynette Rogers is an individual who is a citizen of the State of New York 

residing in Kings County, New York. 

6. Plaintiff is a natural person allegedly obligated to pay a debt.

7. Plaintiff is a “consumer” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(3). 

8. On information and belief, Defendant Second Round, L.P., is a Texas Limited 

Partnership with a principal place of business in Travis County, Texas.

9. Defendant regularly collects or attempts to collect debts asserted to be owed to 

others. 

10. Defendant is regularly engaged, for profit, in the collection of debts allegedly owed 

by consumers. 

11. The principal purpose of Defendant's business is the collection of such debts.

12. Defendant uses the mails in its debt collection business.

13. Defendant is a “debt collector” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6). 

ALLEGATIONS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF

14. Defendant alleges Plaintiff owes a debt (“the alleged Debt”). 

15. The alleged Debt is an alleged obligation of Plaintiff to pay money arising out of a 

transaction in which the money, property, insurance, or services which are the subject of the 

transaction are primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.

16. The alleged Debt does not arise from any business enterprise of Plaintiff.

17. The alleged Debt is a “debt” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(5).

18. At an exact time known only to Defendant, the alleged Debt was assigned or 

otherwise transferred to Defendant for collection. 

19. At the time the alleged Debt was assigned or otherwise transferred to Defendant for 

collection, the alleged Debt was in default.

20. In its efforts to collect the alleged Debt, Defendant contacted Plaintiff by letter (“the 

Letter”) dated December 5, 2019. (A true and accurate copy is annexed hereto as “Exhibit 1.”)

21. The Letter conveyed information regarding the alleged Debt.

Case 1:20-cv-00426-RP Document 1 Filed 04/22/20 Page 2 of 10
3

22. The Letter is a “communication” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(2). 

23. The Letter was the initial written communication Plaintiff received from Defendant 

concerning the alleged Debt.

24. The Letter was received and read by Plaintiff.

25. 15 U.S.C. § 1692g protects Plaintiff's concrete interests. Plaintiff has the interest 

and right to receive a clear, accurate and unambiguous validation notice, which allows a consumer 

to confirm that he or she owes the debt sought to be collected by the debt collector. As set forth 

herein, Defendant deprived Plaintiff of this right.

26. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e protects Plaintiff's concrete interests. Plaintiff has the interest 

and right to be free from deceptive and/or misleading communications from Defendant. As set 

forth herein, Defendant deprived Plaintiff of this right.

27. The deprivation of Plaintiff's rights will be redressed by a favorable decision herein. 

FIRST COUNT

Violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a)(1)

28. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if fully restated herein. 

29. 15 U.S.C. § 1692g provides that within five days after the initial communication 

with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the 

information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the 

consumer a written notice containing certain enumerated information.

30. As relevant here, 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a)(1) requires the written notice provide “the 

amount of the debt.”

31. To comply with 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a)(1), a statement of “the amount of the debt” 

must accurately state the amount of the debt.

32. A statement of “the amount of the debt,” when the debt is not owed at all by the 

consumer, violates 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a)(1).

33. The Letter claims that Plaintiff owed $397.85.

34. Plaintiff did not owe $397.85.

35. Plaintiff did not owe any money at all to the entity on whose behalf Defendant was 

seeking to collect.

36. Defendant's statement of the amount of the alleged Debt, when Plaintiff did not owe 

any money at all to the entity on whose behalf Defendant was seeking to collect, violates 15 U.S.C. 

Case 1:20-cv-00426-RP Document 1 Filed 04/22/20 Page 3 of 10
4

§ 1692g(a)(1).

37. For the foregoing reasons, Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a)(1) and is liable 

to Plaintiff therefor.

SECOND COUNT

Violations of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e, 1692e(2)(A) and 1692e(10)

38. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if fully restated herein.

39. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e provides, generally, that a debt collector may not use any false, 

deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. 

40. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt, when the debt is not 

owed at all by the consumer, is a false representation made in connection with the collection of 

any debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.

41. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt, when the debt is not 

owed at all by the consumer, is a deceptive representation made in connection with the collection 

of any debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.

42. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt, when the debt is not 

owed at all by the consumer, is a misleading representation made in connection with the collection 

of any debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.

43. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A) prohibits the false representation of the character, amount, 

or legal status of any debt.

44. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt, when the debt is not 

owed at all by the consumer, is a false representation of the character of the debt, in violation of 

15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A).

45. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt, when the debt is not 

owed at all by the consumer, is a false representation of the amount of the debt, in violation of 15 

U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A).

46. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt, when the debt is not 

owed at all by the consumer, is a false representation of the legal status of the debt, in violation of 

15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A).

47. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10) prohibits the use of any false representation or deceptive 

means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. 

Case 1:20-cv-00426-RP Document 1 Filed 04/22/20 Page 4 of 10
5

48. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt, when the debt is not 

owed at all by the consumer, is a false representation made in an attempt to collect the debt in 

violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10).

49. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt, when the debt is not 

owed at all by the consumer, is a deceptive means used in an attempt to collect the debt in violation 

of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10).

50. The Letter alleges that Plaintiff owed $397.85.

51. Plaintiff did not owe $397.85.

52. Plaintiff did not owe any money at all to the entity on whose behalf Defendant was 

seeking to collect.

53. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed $397.85, when Plaintiff did not owe any 

money at all to the entity on whose behalf Defendant was seeking to collect, is a false 

representation made by Defendant in connection with Defendant's collection of the alleged Debt, 

in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.

54. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed $397.85, when Plaintiff did not owe any 

money at all to the entity on whose behalf Defendant was seeking to collect, is a deceptive 

representation made by Defendant in connection with Defendant's collection of the alleged Debt, 

in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.

55. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed $397.85, when Plaintiff did not owe any 

money at all to the entity on whose behalf Defendant was seeking to collect, is a misleading 

representation made by Defendant in connection with Defendant's collection of the alleged Debt, 

in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.

56. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed $397.85, when Plaintiff did not owe any 

money at all to the entity on whose behalf Defendant was seeking to collect, is a false 

representation of the character of the alleged Debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A).

57. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed $397.85, when Plaintiff did not owe any 

money at all to the entity on whose behalf Defendant was seeking to collect, is a false 

representation of the amount of the alleged Debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A).

58. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed $397.85, when Plaintiff did not owe any 

money at all to the entity on whose behalf Defendant was seeking to collect, is a false 

representation of the legal status of the alleged Debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A).

Case 1:20-cv-00426-RP Document 1 Filed 04/22/20 Page 5 of 10
6

59. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed $397.85, when Plaintiff did not owe any 

money at all to the entity on whose behalf Defendant was seeking to collect, is a false 

representation made in an attempt to collect the alleged Debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10).

60. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed $397.85, when Plaintiff did not owe any 

money at all to the entity on whose behalf Defendant was seeking to collect, is a deceptive means

used in an attempt to collect the alleged Debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10).

61. For the foregoing reasons, Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e, 1692e(2)(A) 

and 1692e(10) and is liable to Plaintiff therefor.

THIRD COUNT

Violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a)(2)

62. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if fully restated herein. 

63. 15 U.S.C. § 1692g provides that within five days after the initial communication 

with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the 

information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the 

consumer a written notice containing certain enumerated information.

64. As relevant here, 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a)(2) requires the written notice provide “the 

name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed.”

65. To comply with 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a)(2), the written notice must accurately state 

“the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed.”

66. A statement of “the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed,” when the 

consumer does not any money at all to the stated entity, violates 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a)(2).

67. The Letter claims the name of the creditor to whom the alleged Debt is owed is 

Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P.

68. Plaintiff did not owe the alleged Debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P. 

69. Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P never offered to extend credit to Plaintiff.

70. Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P never extended credit to Plaintiff.

71. Plaintiff was never involved in any transaction with Second Round L.P. dba Third 

Round L.P.

72. Plaintiff never entered into any contract with Second Round L.P. dba Third Round 

L.P.

73. Plaintiff never did any business with Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P.

Case 1:20-cv-00426-RP Document 1 Filed 04/22/20 Page 6 of 10
7

74. Plaintiff was never indebted to Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P.

75. Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P is a stranger to Plaintiff.

76. Defendant's statement that Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P is “the name 

of the creditor to whom the debt is owed,” when Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P is not 

the name of the creditor to whom the alleged Debt is owed, violates 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a)(2).

77. For the foregoing reasons, Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a)(2) and is liable 

to Plaintiff therefor.

FOURTH COUNT

Violations of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e, 1692e(2)(A) and 1692e(10)

78. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if fully restated herein.

79. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e provides, generally, that a debt collector may not use any false, 

deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. 

80. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt to a certain entity, 

when the debt is not owed by the consumer to that entity, is a false representation made in 

connection with the collection of any debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.

81. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt to a certain entity, 

when the debt is not owed by the consumer to that entity, is a deceptive representation made in 

connection with the collection of any debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.

82. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt to a certain entity, 

when the debt is not owed by the consumer to that entity, is a misleading representation made in 

connection with the collection of any debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.

83. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A) prohibits the false representation of the character, amount, 

or legal status of any debt.

84. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt to a certain entity, 

when the debt is not owed by the consumer to that entity, is a false representation of the character 

of the debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A).

85. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt to a certain entity, 

when the debt is not owed by the consumer to that entity, is a false representation of the amount 

of the debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A).

Case 1:20-cv-00426-RP Document 1 Filed 04/22/20 Page 7 of 10
8

86. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt to a certain entity, 

when the debt is not owed by the consumer to that entity, is a false representation of the legal status 

of the debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A).

87. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10) prohibits the use of any false representation or deceptive 

means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. 

88. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt to a certain entity, 

when the debt is not owed by the consumer to that entity, is a false representation made in an 

attempt to collect the debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10).

89. An allegation by a debt collector that a consumer owes a debt to a certain entity, 

when the debt is not owed by the consumer to that entity, is a deceptive means used in an attempt 

to collect the debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10).

90. The Letter claims that Plaintiff owes a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third Round 

L.P.

91. Plaintiff did not owe a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P. 

92. Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P never offered to extend credit to Plaintiff.

93. Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P never extended credit to Plaintiff.

94. Plaintiff was never involved in any transaction with Second Round L.P. dba Third 

Round L.P.

95. Plaintiff never entered into any contract with Second Round L.P. dba Third Round 

L.P.

96. Plaintiff never did any business with Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P.

97. Plaintiff was never indebted to Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P.

98. Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P is a stranger to Plaintiff.

99. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third 

Round L.P, when Plaintiff did not owe a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P, is a 

false representation made by Defendant in connection with Defendant's collection of the alleged 

Debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.

100. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third 

Round L.P, when Plaintiff did not owe a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P, is a 

deceptive representation made by Defendant in connection with Defendant's collection of the 

alleged Debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.

Case 1:20-cv-00426-RP Document 1 Filed 04/22/20 Page 8 of 10
9

101. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third 

Round L.P, when Plaintiff did not owe a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P, is a 

misleading representation made by Defendant in connection with Defendant's collection of the 

alleged Debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.

102. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third 

Round L.P, when Plaintiff did not owe a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P, is a 

false representation of the character of the alleged Debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A).

103. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third 

Round L.P, when Plaintiff did not owe a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P, is a 

false representation of the amount of the alleged Debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A).

104. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third 

Round L.P, when Plaintiff did not owe a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P, is a 

false representation of the legal status of the alleged Debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A).

105. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third 

Round L.P, when Plaintiff did not owe a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P, is a 

false representation made in an attempt to collect the alleged Debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 

1692e(10).

106. Defendant's allegation that Plaintiff owed a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third 

Round L.P, when Plaintiff did not owe a debt to Second Round L.P. dba Third Round L.P, is a 

deceptive means used in an attempt to collect the alleged Debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 

1692e(10).

107. Defendant's demand that Plaintiff make payment for a debt that she does not owe 

is a false representation made to attempt to collect any debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10).

108. Defendant's request that Plaintiff make payment for a debt that she does not owe is 

a deceptive means used to attempt to collect any debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10).

109. For the foregoing reasons, Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e, 1692e(2)(A) 

and 1692e(10) and is liable to Plaintiff therefor.

JURY DEMAND

110. Plaintiff hereby demands a trial of this action by jury.

Case 1:20-cv-00426-RP Document 1 Filed 04/22/20 Page 9 of 10
10

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment be entered:

a. Finding Defendant's actions violate the FDCPA; and 

b. Granting damages against Defendant pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1692k; and

c. Granting Plaintiff's attorneys' fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1692k; and

d. Granting Plaintiff's costs; all together with

e. Such other relief that the Court determines is just and proper.

DATED: April 17, 2020

BARSHAY SANDERS, PLLC

By: _/s/ Craig B. Sanders 

Craig B. Sanders, Esquire

100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500

Garden City, New York 11530 

Tel: (516) 203-7600

Fax: (516) 706-5055

csanders@barshaysanders.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Our File No.: 118882

Case 1:20-cv-00426-RP Document 1 Filed 04/22/20 Page 10 of 10