Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Fausz v. NPAS, Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Louisville

March 9, 2017

ELLA J. FAUSZ, individually, and on behalf of a class of similarly situated persons PLAINTIFFS
v.
NPAS, Inc. DEFENDANT

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          CHARLES R. SIMPSON III, SENIOR JUDGE

         I. Introduction

         This matter is before the Court on the motion of Defendant NPAS, Inc. (NPAS) for leave to file under seal its partial objection to Magistrate Judge Dave Whalin's order dated January 11, 2017 that denied its motion for a protective order and granted Plaintiff Ella J. Fausz's motion for sanctions. Mot. Seal 1, ECF No. 61. NPAS also moves to file under seal the accompanying exhibits A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H. Id. NPAS filed its partial objection to the magistrate judge's order in the usual course. Part. Obj. 1, ECF No. 62. NPAS, however, tendered the eight accompanying exhibits under seal. Ex. A-H, ECF No. 63. For the reasons explained below, the Court will grant in part and deny in part NPAS's motion to file under seal its partial objection to the magistrate judge's order and the accompanying exhibits A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H.

         II. Background

         As this Court previously explained, Fausz asserts that NPAS violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. by failing to provide certain information in correspondence with her.[1] Compl. ¶¶ 23-26, ECF No. 1. In August 2016, Fausz moved for sanctions against NPAS for violating a previous discovery-related order of the magistrate judge that was dated January 5, 2016. Mot. Sanctions 1, ECF No. 48.

         The magistrate judge granted Fausz's motion for sanctions and mandated that NPAS, among other actions, “pay the reasonable and necessary costs and attorney fees incurred by [Fausz] in bringing the present motion for sanctions.”[2] Order 1/14/17 23, ECF No. 59.

         NPAS has filed an objection to the portion of the magistrate judge's order that granted Fausz's motion for sanctions. Obj. 1, ECF No. 62. NPAS filed its partial objection in the usual course. Id. It filed the following eight exhibits under seal:

• Exhibit A. HCA Holdings, Inc. Comprehensive Health Care Liability Policy
• Exhibit B. A training power point presentation entitled, “Fair Debt Collection Practices Act: Compliance Training” • Exhibit C. HealthStream Quiz regarding the FDCPA
• Exhibit D. Parallon training and procedures materials regarding how to handle patient accounts
• Exhibit E. Patient account information
• Exhibit F. Additional patient account information
• Exhibit G. Available data entry points
• Exhibit H. Patient letters with coding ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.