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

TRINETTE G. KENT (State Bar No. 025180)

10645 North Tatum Blvd., Suite 200-192

Phoenix, AZ 85028

Telephone: (480) 247-9644

Facsimile: (480) 717-4781

E-mail: tkent@kentlawpc.com

Of Counsel to:

Arizona Credit Lawyers

22142 West Nine Mile Road

Southfield, MI 48033

Telephone: (248) 353-2882

Facsimile: (248) 353-4840

Attorneys for Plaintiff,

Barry Roth

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Barry Roth,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Trans Union, LLC,

a Delaware limited liability company;

Equifax Information Services, LLC, 

a Georgia corporation;

First Premier Bank, 

a foreign corporation;

Bureau of Medical Economics, 

an Arizona corporation, and

Wilshire Commercial Capital, LLC

a California corporation,

Defendants.

Case No.: 

COMPLAINT

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 1 of 20
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

NOW COMES THE PLAINTIFF, BARRY ROTH, BY AND THROUGH 

COUNSEL, TRINETTE G. KENT, and for his Complaint against the Defendants, 

pleads as follows:

JURISDICTION

1. Jurisdiction of this court arises under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”)

15 U.S.C. §1681p., and 28 U.S.C. §§1331, 1337 and the Fair Debt Collection 

Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. §1692k(d) and 28 U.S.C. §§1331,1337.

VENUE

2. The transactions and occurrences which give rise to this action occurred in the 

City of Queen Valley, Pinal County, Arizona. 

3. Venue is proper in the District of Arizona, Phoenix Division. 

PARTIES

4. The Defendants to this lawsuit are:

a. Trans Union, LLC (“Trans Union”), which is an Delaware company that 

maintains a registered agent in Maricopa County, Arizona;

b. Equifax Information Services, LLC (“Equifax”), which is a Georgia 

company that maintains a registered agent in Maricopa County, Arizona; 

c. First Premier Bank, (“First Premier”) which, upon information and belief, 

is a foreign company that maintains its offices in South Dakota; 

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 2 of 20
3

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

d. Bureau of Medical Economics (“BME”), which is an Arizona corporation 

that maintains its registered agent in Maricopa County, Arizona; and

e. Wilshire Commercial Capital, LLC, (“Wilshire”), which is a California 

corporation that maintains a registered agent in Maricopa County, 

Arizona.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

5. First Premier is reporting its trade line on Plaintiff’s Experian credit file with 

account number 517800637875 ....with multiple charge offs. Wilshire is also 

reporting its trade line with account number 55....on Mr. Roth’s Experian credit 

file with multiple charge offs. Both of these trade lines are hereinafter referred 

to as “Errant Trade Lines.” 

6. These multiple charge offs convey to any user or prospective of Plaintiff's credit

reports that, not only did a charge off incur on a particular date, but for several 

months thereafter. These repetitive charge off notations are far more punitive 

and misleading than informative.

7. Further, BME is reporting its trade line with account number 6120187 (“Bogus 

Trade Line”) on Mr. Roth’s Experian, Equifax, and Trans Union (“Credit 

Reporting Agencies” or “CRAs”) credit files. The Bogus Trade Line is 

allegedly owed to AZ Indian Health Services with a balance of $1,093.00. This 

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 3 of 20
4

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

does not belong to Mr. Roth, as he has never been a patient nor received any 

type of services from AZ Indian Health Services. 

8. Sometime in the fall of 2014, Mr. Roth discovered the Bogus Trade Line on his 

credit files. Shortly thereafter, he submitted letters to the CRAs disputing the 

Bogus Trade Line. 

9. On or about September 2015, Mr. Roth obtained his Experian credit file and 

noticed the multiple charge offs on both of the Errant Trade Lines.

10.On or about November 5, 2015, Mr. Roth submitted letters to the CRAs,

disputing the Bogus Trade Line. He also disputed the multiple charge offs on 

both of the Errant Trade Lines with Experian.

11.Upon information and belief, the CRAs forwarded Mr. Roth’s disputes to First 

Premier, BME, and Wilshire.

12.On or about November 21, 2015, Mr. Roth received Trans Union’s 

investigation results, which showed that BME retained the Bogus Trade Line.

13.On or about November 23, 2015, Mr. Roth received Equifax’s investigation 

results, which also showed that BME retained the Bogus Trade Line.

14.On or about November 26, 2015, Mr. Roth received Experian’s investigation 

results, which showed that First Premier retained the multiple charge offs on its 

Errant Trade Line. 

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 4 of 20
5

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

15.On or about December 4, 2015, Mr. Roth received another investigation result 

from Experian, which showed that both First Premier and Wilshire retained the 

multiple charge offs on the Errant Trade Lines. Further, BME retained the 

Bogus Trade Line. 

COUNT I

NEGLIGENT VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT

BY FIRST PREMIER

16.Plaintiff re-alleges the above paragraphs as if recited verbatim.

17.After being informed by Experian of Mr. Roth’s consumer dispute regarding 

the Errant Trade Line, First Premier negligently failed to conduct a proper 

reinvestigation of Mr. Roth’s disputes as required by 15 USC 1681s-2(b). 

18.First Premier negligently failed to review all relevant information available to it 

and provided by Experian in conducting its reinvestigation as required by 15 

USC 1681s-2(b). Specifically, it failed to direct Experian to remove the 

multiple charge-offs from the Errant Trade Line from Mr. Roth’s consumer 

credit report.

19.The Errant Trade Line is inaccurate and creating a misleading impression on 

Mr. Roth’s consumer credit file with Experian to which it is reporting such 

trade line.

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 5 of 20
6

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

20.As a direct and proximate cause of First Premier’s negligent failure to perform 

its duties under the FCRA, Mr. Roth has suffered damages, mental anguish, 

suffering, humiliation, and embarrassment.

21.First Premier is liable to Mr. Roth by reason of its violations of the FCRA in an 

amount to be determined by the trier fact, together with reasonable attorneys’ 

fees pursuant to 15 USC 1681o. 

22.Mr. Roth has a private right of action to assert claims against First Premier 

arising under 15 USC 1681s-2(b).

WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF PRAYS that this court grant him a judgment 

against First Premier for damages, costs, interest, and attorneys’ fees.

COUNT II

WILLFUL VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT BY

FIRST PREMIER

23.Plaintiff re-alleges the above paragraphs as if recited verbatim.

24.After being informed by Experian that Mr. Roth disputed the accuracy of the 

information it was providing, First Premier willfully failed to conduct a proper 

investigation of Mr. Roth’s dispute. 

25.First Premier willfully failed to review all relevant information available to it 

and provided by Experian as required by 15 USC 1681s-2(b).

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 6 of 20
7

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

26.As a direct and proximate cause of First Premier’s willful failure to perform its 

respective duties under the FCRA, Mr. Roth has suffered damages, mental 

anguish, suffering, humiliation, and embarrassment.

27.First Premier is liable to Mr. Roth for either statutory damages or actual 

damages he has sustained by reason of its violations of the FCRA in an amount 

to be determined by the trier fact, together with an award of punitive damages 

in the amount to be determined by the trier of fact, as well as for reasonable 

attorneys’ fees that he may recover therefore pursuant to 15 USC 1681n.

WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF PRAYS that this court grant him a judgment 

against First Premier for the greater of statutory or actual damages, plus punitive 

damages, along with costs, interest, and attorneys’ fees.

COUNT III

NEGLIGENT VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT

BY BME

28.Plaintiff re-alleges the above paragraphs as if recited verbatim.

29.After being informed by the CRAs of Mr. Roth’s consumer dispute regarding 

the Bogus Trade Line, BME negligently failed to conduct a proper 

reinvestigation of Mr. Roth’s dispute as required by 15 USC 1681s-2(b). 

30.BME negligently failed to review all relevant information available to it and 

provided by the CRAs in conducting its reinvestigation as required by 15 USC 

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 7 of 20
8

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

1681s-2(b). Specifically, it failed to direct the CRAs to remove Bogus Trade 

Line from Mr. Roth’s consumer credit reports.

31.The Bogus Trade Line is inaccurate and creating a misleading impression on 

Mr. Roth’s consumer credit file with Trans Union, Equifax and Experian to 

which it is reporting such trade line.

32.As a direct and proximate cause of BME’s negligent failure to perform its 

duties under the FCRA, Mr. Roth has suffered damages, mental anguish, 

suffering, humiliation, and embarrassment.

33.BME is liable to Mr. Roth by reason of its violations of the FCRA in an amount 

to be determined by the trier fact, together with reasonable attorneys’ fees 

pursuant to 15 USC 1681o. 

34.Mr. Roth has a private right of action to assert claims against BME arising 

under 15 USC 1681s-2(b).

WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF PRAYS that this court grant him a judgment 

against BME for damages, costs, interest, and attorneys’ fees.

COUNT IV

WILLFUL VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT BY

BME

35.Plaintiff re-alleges the above paragraphs as if recited verbatim.

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 8 of 20
9

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

36.After being informed by the CRAs that Mr. Roth disputed the accuracy of the 

information it was providing, BME willfully failed to conduct a proper 

reinvestigation of Mr. Roth’s dispute. 

37.BME willfully failed to review all relevant information available to it and 

provided by the CRAs as required by 15 USC 1681s-2(b).

38.As a direct and proximate cause of BME’s willful failure to perform its 

respective duties under the FCRA, Mr. Roth has suffered damages, mental 

anguish, suffering, humiliation, and embarrassment.

39.BME is liable to Mr. Roth for either statutory damages or actual damages he 

has sustained by reason of its violations of the FCRA in an amount to be 

determined by the trier fact, together with an award of punitive damages in the 

amount to be determined by the trier of fact, as well as for reasonable attorneys’ 

fees that he may recover therefore pursuant to 15 USC 1681n.

WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF PRAYS that this court grant him a judgment 

against BME for the greater of statutory or actual damages, plus punitive damages, 

along with costs, interest, and attorneys’ fees.

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 9 of 20
10

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

COUNT V

VIOLATION OF THE FAIR DEBT 

COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT-BME

40.Plaintiff reincorporates the preceding allegations by reference.

41.At all relevant times, Defendant BME, in the ordinary course of its business, 

regularly engaged in the practice of collecting debts on behalf of other 

individuals or entities.

42.Ms. Roth is a "consumer" for purposes of the FDCPA, and the account at issue 

in this case is a consumer debt.

43.Defendant BME is a "debt collector" under the Fair Debt Collection Practices 

Act ("FDCPA"), 15 U.S.C. §1692a(6).

44.Defendant BME’s foregoing acts in attempting to collect this alleged debt 

violated the following provisions of the FDCPA:

a. 15 U.S.C. §1692e(8) by communicating or threatening to communicate to 

any person credit information which is known or which should be known 

to be false. Defendant BME did this when it retained the Bogus Trade 

Line on Mr. Roth’s Experian credit file when it knew or should have 

known that Mr. Roth was not liable for the alleged debt. 

b. 15 U.S.C. §1692e2(A) by misrepresenting the character, amount, or legal 

status of any debt as Mr. Roth does not owe the alleged debt yet BME is 

reporting it on his Experian credit file. 

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 10 of 20
11

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

c. 15 U.S.C. §1692f(1) by collecting any amount not permitted by law as 

Mr. Roth does not owe any alleged debt to BME. 

45.Mr. Roth has suffered economic, emotional, general, and statutory damages as a 

result of these violations of the FDCPA.

WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF PRAYS that this court grant him a judgment 

against Defendant BME for actual damages, costs, interest, and attorneys’ fees. 

COUNT VI

NEGLIGENT VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT

BY WILSHIRE

46.Plaintiff re-alleges the above paragraphs as if recited verbatim.

47.After being informed by Experian of Mr. Roth’s consumer dispute regarding 

the Errant Trade Line, Wilshire negligently failed to conduct a proper 

reinvestigation of Mr. Roth’s dispute as required by 15 USC 1681s-2(b). 

48.Wilshire negligently failed to review all relevant information available to it and 

provided by Experian in conducting its reinvestigation as required by 15 USC 

1681s-2(b). Specifically, it failed to direct Experian to remove the multiple 

charge offs from the Errant Trade Line from Mr. Roth’s consumer credit report.

49.The Errant Trade Line is inaccurate and creating a misleading impression on 

Mr. Roth’s consumer credit file with Experian to which it is reporting such 

trade line.

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 11 of 20
12

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

50.As a direct and proximate cause of Wilshire’s negligent failure to perform its 

duties under the FCRA, Mr. Roth has suffered damages, mental anguish, 

suffering, humiliation, and embarrassment.

51.Wilshire is liable to Mr. Roth by reason of its violations of the FCRA in an 

amount to be determined by the trier fact, together with reasonable attorneys’ 

fees pursuant to 15 USC 1681o. 

52.Mr. Roth has a private right of action to assert claims against Wilshire arising 

under 15 USC 1681s-2(b).

WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF PRAYS that this court grant him a judgment 

against Wilshire for damages, costs, interest, and attorneys’ fees.

COUNT VII

WILLFUL VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT BY

 WILSHIRE

53.Plaintiff re-alleges the above paragraphs as if recited verbatim.

54.After being informed by Experian that Mr. Roth disputed the accuracy of the 

information it was providing, Wilshire willfully failed to conduct a proper 

investigation of Mr. Roth’s dispute. 

55.Wilshire willfully failed to review all relevant information available to it and 

provided by Experian as required by 15 USC 1681s-2(b).

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 12 of 20
13

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

56.As a direct and proximate cause of Wilshire’s willful failure to perform its 

respective duties under the FCRA, Mr. Roth has suffered damages, mental 

anguish, suffering, humiliation, and embarrassment.

57.Wilshire is liable to Mr. Roth for either statutory damages or actual damages he 

has sustained by reason of its violations of the FCRA in an amount to be 

determined by the trier fact, together with an award of punitive damages in the 

amount to be determined by the trier of fact, as well as for reasonable attorneys’ 

fees that he may recover therefore pursuant to 15 USC 1681n.

WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF PRAYS that this court grant him a judgment 

against Wilshire for the greater of statutory or actual damages, plus punitive damages, 

along with costs, interest, and attorneys’ fees.

COUNT VIII

NEGLIGENT VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT BY 

TRANS UNION

58.Plaintiff re-alleges the above paragraphs as if recited verbatim.

59.Defendant Trans Union prepared, compiled, issued, assembled, transferred, 

published, and otherwise reproduced consumer reports regarding Mr. Roth as 

that term is defined in 15 USC 1681a.

60.Such reports contained information about Mr. Roth that was false, misleading,

and inaccurate.

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 13 of 20
14

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

61.Trans Union negligently failed to maintain and/or follow reasonable procedures 

to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information it reported to one or 

more third parties pertaining to Mr. Roth, in violation of 15 USC 1681e(b).

62. After receiving Mr. Roth’s consumer dispute to the Bogus Trade Line, Trans 

Union negligently failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation as required by 

15 U.S.C. 1681i.

63.As a direct and proximate cause of Trans Union’s negligent failure to perform 

its duties under the FCRA, Mr. Roth has suffered actual damages, mental 

anguish and suffering, humiliation, and embarrassment.

64.Trans Union is liable to Mr. Roth by reason of its violation of the FCRA in an 

amount to be determined by the trier fact together with his reasonable attorneys’ 

fees pursuant to 15 USC 1681o. 

WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF PRAYS that this court grant him a judgment 

against Trans Union for actual damages, costs, interest, and attorneys’ fees.

COUNT IX

WILLFUL VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT BY 

TRANS UNION 

65.Plaintiff re-alleges the above paragraphs as if recited verbatim.

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 14 of 20
15

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

66.Defendant Trans Union prepared, compiled, issued, assembled, transferred, 

published and otherwise reproduced consumer reports regarding Mr. Roth as 

that term is defined in 15 USC 1681a.

67.Such reports contained information about Plaintiff that was false, misleading,

and inaccurate.

68.Trans Union willfully failed to maintain and/or follow reasonable procedures to

assure maximum possible accuracy of the information that it reported to one or 

more third parties pertaining to Mr. Roth, in violation of 15 USC 1681e(b).

69. After receiving Mr. Roth’s consumer dispute to the Bogus Trade Line, Trans 

Union willfully failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation as required by 15 

U.S.C. 1681i.

70.As a direct and proximate cause of Trans Union‘s willful failure to perform its 

duties under the FCRA, Mr. Roth has suffered actual damages, mental anguish 

and suffering, humiliation, and embarrassment.

71.Trans Union is liable to Mr. Roth by reason of its violations of the FCRA in an 

amount to be determined by the trier of fact, together with his reasonable 

attorneys’ fees pursuant to 15 USC 1681n. 

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 15 of 20
16

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

1. WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF PRAYS that this court grant him a judgment 

against Defendant Trans Union for the greater of statutory or actual damages, plus 

punitive damages along with costs, interest, and reasonable attorneys’ fees.

COUNT X

NEGLIGENT VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT

BY EQUIFAX

72.Plaintiff re-alleges the above paragraphs as if recited verbatim.

73.Defendant Equifax prepared, compiled, issued, assembled, transferred, 

published, and otherwise reproduced consumer reports regarding Mr. Roth as 

that term is defined in 15 USC 1681a.

74.Such reports contained information about Mr. Roth that was false, misleading,

and inaccurate.

75.Equifax negligently failed to maintain and/or follow reasonable procedures to 

assure maximum possible accuracy of the information it reported to one or 

more third parties pertaining to Mr. Roth, in violation of 15 USC 1681e(b).

76. After receiving Mr. Roth’s consumer dispute to the Bogus Trade Line, Equifax 

negligently failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation as required by 15 

U.S.C. 1681i.

77.As a direct and proximate cause of Equifax’s negligent failure to perform its 

duties under the FCRA, Mr. Roth has suffered actual damages, mental anguish 

and suffering, humiliation, and embarrassment.

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 16 of 20
17

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

78.Equifax is liable to Mr. Roth by reason of its violation of the FCRA in an 

amount to be determined by the trier fact, together with his reasonable 

attorneys’ fees pursuant to 15 USC 1681o. 

WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF PRAYS that the court grant him a judgment 

against Equifax for actual damages, costs, interest, and attorneys’ fees.

COUNT XI

WILLFUL VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT

BY EQUIFAX

79.Plaintiff re-alleges the above paragraphs as if recited verbatim.

80.Defendant Equifax prepared, compiled, issued, assembled, transferred, 

published, and otherwise reproduced consumer reports regarding Mr. Roth as 

that term is defined in 15 USC 1681a.

81.Such reports contained information about Mr. Roth that was false, misleading,

and inaccurate.

82.Equifax willfully failed to maintain and/or follow reasonable procedures to 

assure maximum possible accuracy of the information that it reported to one or 

more third parties pertaining to Mr. Roth, in violation of 15 USC 1681e(b).

83. After receiving the Plaintiff’s consumer dispute to the Bogus Trade Line, 

Equifax willfully failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation as required by 

15 U.S.C. 1681i.

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 17 of 20
18

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

84.As a direct and proximate cause of Equifax’s willful failure to perform its duties 

under the FCRA, Mr. Roth has suffered actual damages, mental anguish and 

suffering, humiliation, and embarrassment.

85.Equifax is liable to Mr. Roth by reason of its violations of the FCRA in an 

amount to be determined by the trier of fact, together with his reasonable 

attorneys’ fees pursuant to 15 USC 1681n. 

WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF PRAYS that this court grant him a judgment 

against Defendant Equifax for the greater of statutory or actual damages, plus punitive 

damages along with costs, interest, and reasonable attorneys’ fees.

DEMAND FOR JUDGMENT RELIEF

Accordingly, Plaintiff requests that the Court grant him the following relief against 

the Defendants:

a. Actual damages;

b. Statutory damages; and

c. Statutory costs and attorneys’ fees.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by Jury.

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 18 of 20
19

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

DATED: February 2, 2016 NITZKIN & ASSOCIATES

By: /s/ Trinette G. Kent 

Trinette G. Kent

Attorneys for Plaintiff,

Barry Roth

Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 19 of 20
Case 2:16-cv-00301-SPL Document 1 Filed 02/02/16 Page 20 of 20