JOINT 26(F) CONFERENCE REPORT PAGE 1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

Eastern District of Texas 

Sherman Division 

George Kenneth Schopp, 

Plaintiff,

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§

CA No.: 4:23-cv-568-SDJ 

v. §

§ Class Action

National Debt Relief, LLC, 

Defendant.

§ 

§ 

§ 

Jury Demanded 

JOINT ATTORNEY RULE 26(f) CONFERENCE REPORT 

Plaintiff and Defendant submit the following conference report. 

1. A brief factual and legal synopsis of the case. 

Response: Plaintiff brings this case as a class action. Plaintiff alleges that the 

Defendant or its representative placed pre-recorded marketing calls to 

Plaintiff’s residential cellular telephone number, registered with the National 

Do Not Call Registry, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act 

(“TCPA”) and Sections 305-053(a) of the Texas Business & Commerce Code 

and Section 302.101 of the Texas Business and Commerce Code. Plaintiff 

asserts claims individually and on behalf of 4 classes of individuals who 

allegedly received similar telephone calls from Defendant or its 

representative. 

Defendant denies the material allegations set forth in Plaintiff’s Complaint, 

including Plaintiff’s entitlement to damages, and disputes the contentions 

raised therein. Among other denials and defenses, Defendant asserts that (i) 

to the extent Plaintiff was called by a third party, such third party did not 

have authority from Defendant to make any such calls on behalf of 

Defendant, and (ii) to the extent Plaintiff can establish he was called by 

Defendant, such call would only have been initiated by Defendant pursuant 

to Plaintiff’s consent or established business relationship. Defendant further 

disputes any basis exists to convert the existing action into a nationwide 

Case 4:23-cv-00568-SDJ Document 11 Filed 08/23/23 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 64
JOINT 26(F) CONFERENCE REPORT PAGE 2 

class action as, among other reasons, Plaintiff cannot establish the 

requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.

 

2. The jurisdictional basis for this suit. 

Response: The Court has federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1331. 

Plaintiff is asserting claims under 47 U.S.C. §2274, the Telephone Consumer 

Protection Act. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the state law 

claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). 

3. A list of the correct names of the parties to this action and any anticipated 

additional or potential parties. 

Response: George Kenneth Schopp and National Debt Relief, LLC. Those 

are the correct names of the parties Additional parties may be 

added as defendants if discovery shows the identity of the 

individuals making the calls at issue. 

4. A list of any cases related to this case pending in any state or federal court, 

identifying the case numbers and courts along with an explanation of the status of 

those cases. 

Response: None. 

5. Confirmation that the initial disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1) and this Order 

have been completed. 

Response: Plaintiff’s Initial Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures are complete. 

Defendant will exchange its Initial Rule 26(a)(1) by September 4, 

2024 

6. Proposed scheduling order deadlines. 

Response: See the attached exhibit. 

Case 4:23-cv-00568-SDJ Document 11 Filed 08/23/23 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 65
JOINT 26(F) CONFERENCE REPORT PAGE 3 

7. Description, in accordance with Rule 26(f), of the following: 

i. The subjects on which discovery may be needed, when discovery should 

be completed, and whether discovery should be conducted in phases or be 

limited to or focused on particular issues. 

Response: 

Plaintiff’s Response: 

Plaintiff proposes discovery regarding Defendant’s the call detail records, the 

Defendant’s policies and whether Defendant has consent to call the Plaintiff 

and the proposed class members. 

Plaintiff will file a motion for class certification after initial discovery has been 

conducted. Plaintiff, however, expects to meet an aggressive timetable for 

filing a motion for class certification, as TCPA cases are routinely certified as 

class actions. 

Defendant’s Response: 

Defendant seeks discovery from Plaintiff and/or third-parties on the 

following subjects: (1) user, subscriber, registrant, payor, and/ or owner 

information related to the cellular telephone at issue in the Complaint; 

(2) call data regarding calls to the cellular telephone at issue in the 

Complaint; (3) the allegations set forth in Plaintiff’s Complaint and any 

amendments thereto; (4) Plaintiff and/or any other putative class 

member’s relationship with Defendant (or any other third party 

allegedly acting on behalf of Defendant); (5) Plaintiff and/or any other 

putative class member’s consent to receive the call(s) alleged in the 

Complaint; (6) identification of witnesses; (7) Plaintiff and/or any other 

putative class member’s relationship with any third parties that may 

have relevant information concerning the allegations and affirmative 

defenses asserted in this action; (8) Plaintiff and/or any other putative 

class member’s registration on the national Do-Not-Call registry the 

phone system(s) used to allegedly call and send text messages to 

Plaintiff; and (9) a physical inspection of the cellular telephone at issue 

in the Complaint. Additionally, Defendant intends to obtain written 

discovery regarding, and the depositions of, any experts retained by 

Plaintiff in connection with Plaintiff’s claims. 

Case 4:23-cv-00568-SDJ Document 11 Filed 08/23/23 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 66
JOINT 26(F) CONFERENCE REPORT PAGE 4 

 

ii. Any issues relating to disclosure or discovery of electronically stored 

information (“ESI”), including the form or forms in which it should be 

produced (whether native or some other reasonably useable format) as 

well as any methodologies for identifying or culling the relevant and 

discoverable ESI. Any disputes regarding ESI that counsel for the parties 

are unable to resolve during conference must be identified in the report. 

Response: The parties are not aware of any issues about disclosure, 

discovery, or preservation of electronically stored information requiring 

the Court’s attention at this time, but agree to address any such issues, 

in good faith, should it become necessary. Defendant agrees to produce 

relevant call detail records in native format. 

iii. Any agreements or disputes relating to asserting claims of privilege or 

preserving discoverable information, including ESI, and any agreements 

reached under FRE 502 (such as the potential need for a protective order 

and any procedures to which the parties might agree for handling 

inadvertent production of privileged information or other privilege waiver 

issues). A party asserting that any information is confidential should 

immediately apply to the court for entry of a protective order. 

Response: The parties are not aware of any issues about claims of 

privilege attention at this time. The parties anticipate discovery may seek 

confidential, trade secret, and/or commercially sensitive information of 

either party. The parties believe, in good faith, a protective order is 

necessary to protect such information and will negotiate, draft, and submit 

an appropriate order to the Court for consideration. 

iv. Any changes that should be made in the limitations on discovery imposed 

by the Rules, whether federal or local, and any other limitations that should 

be imposed. 

Response: Plaintiff requests no changes. Defendant requests no changes. 

Case 4:23-cv-00568-SDJ Document 11 Filed 08/23/23 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 67
JOINT 26(F) CONFERENCE REPORT PAGE 5 

v. Whether any other orders should be entered by the court pursuant to 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) or Rule 16(b), (c). 

Response: Aside from the anticipated protective order addressed in 

Section 7(iii), the parties are unaware of any other orders that the Court 

should issue under Rule 26(c) or 16(f) at this time. 

8. State the progress made toward settlement, and the present status of settlement 

negotiations, including whether a demand and offer has been made. If the parties 

have agreed upon a mediator, also state the name, address, and phone number of 

that mediator, and a proposed deadline for mediation. An early date is encouraged 

to reduce expenses. The court will appoint a mediator if none is agreed upon. 

Response: Plaintiff is not in a position to discuss settlement until the size 

of the class is known. 

9. The identity of persons expected to be deposed. 

Response: Plaintiff, the individuals making the calls, Defendant’s 

corporate representative and individuals knowledgeable on Defendant’s 

telemarketing marketing policies and practices, and any witnesses 

identified in the course of discovery. 

10. Estimated trial time and whether a jury demand has been timely made. 

Response: 1-2 days. Plaintiff timely requested a trial by jury. 

11. The names of the attorneys who will appear on behalf of the parties at the 

management conference (the appearing attorney must be the lead counsel and 

have full authority to bind the client). 

Response: Chris Miltenberger for Plaintiff and Julie Moeller for 

Defendant. 

12. Whether the parties jointly consent to trial before a magistrate judge. 

Response: The parties do not jointly consent to trial before a magistrate 

judge. 

Case 4:23-cv-00568-SDJ Document 11 Filed 08/23/23 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 68
JOINT 26(F) CONFERENCE REPORT PAGE 6 

13. Any other matters that counsel deem appropriate for inclusion in the joint 

conference report or that deserve the special attention of the Court at the 

management conference. 

Response: None at this time. 

Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Chris R. Miltenberger 

 Chris R. Miltenberger 

Texas Bar Number: 14171200 

The Law Office of Chris R. 

Miltenberger, PLLC 

1360 N. White Chapel, Suite 200 

Southlake, Texas 76092-4322 

817-416-5060 (office) 

817-416-5062 (fax) 

chris@crmlawpractice.com

Designated as Lead Attorney

Attorney for Plaintiff

-andJULIE M. MOELLER 

TX Bar No.: 24073830 

Email: julie.moeller@gmlaw.com 

GREENSPOON MARDER LLP 

700 Milam St., Suite 1300 

Houston, Texas 77002 

Tel: (212) 524-4966 

HALEY JONES-PARTILLA 

(Admission Anticipated) 

Email: haley.jones-partilla@gmlaw.com 

GREENSPOON MARDER LLP 

Case 4:23-cv-00568-SDJ Document 11 Filed 08/23/23 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 69
JOINT 26(F) CONFERENCE REPORT PAGE 7 

2255 Glades Rd. Suite 400-E 

Boca Raton, FL 33431 

Tel: (972) 800-7991 

LAWREN A. ZANN 

(Pro Hac Vice Admission Anticipated) 

Email: lawren.zann@gmlaw.com 

Email: gabby.mangar@gmlaw.com 

GREENSPOON MARDER LLP 

200 East Broward Blvd., Suite 1800 

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 

Tel: (954) 527-6296 

Fax: (954) 333-4027 

Attorneys for National Debt Relief, 

LLC 

Certificate of Service 

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed 

electronically through the Court’s CM/ECF system in compliance with the Local 

Rules. 

By: /s/ Chris R. Miltenberger 

 Chris R. Miltenberger

Case 4:23-cv-00568-SDJ Document 11 Filed 08/23/23 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 70