Case Name: Jobe DANGANAN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. GUARDIAN PROTECTION SERVICES. Petition of: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2017-08-08
Citations: 170 A.3d 981
Docket Number: No. 44 WM 2017
Parties: Jobe DANGANAN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. GUARDIAN PROTECTION SERVICES Petition of: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 170
Pages: 981–982

Head Matter:
Jobe DANGANAN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. GUARDIAN PROTECTION SERVICES Petition of: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
No. 44 WM 2017
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
August 8, 2017

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 8th day of August, 2017, the Petition for Certification of Ques tion of' State Law is GRANTED. This Court shall consider the following issues:
1. Whether a non-Pennsylvania resident may bring suit.under the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (UTPCPL), [73 P.S. § 201-1 to 201-9.3], against a business headquartered in and operating from Pennsylvania, based on transactions which occurred outside of Pennsylvania?
2. If the UTPCPL does- not allow a non-Pennsylvania resident to invoke its protections, whether the parties can, through a choice-of-law provision, expand its protections to parties to the contract who are non-Pennsylvania resident consumers?
The Prothonotary is DIRECTED to establish a briefing schedule and list this case for oral argument.