UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) Introduction

Transcription

1 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 Russell S. Thompson IV E. Southern Ave. D0- Mesa, AZ 0 Thompson Consumer Law Group, PLLC Toll Free: () - ext. Direct: (0) - Facsimile: () - rthompson@consumerlawinfo.com UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Cathy Bopp, on behalf of herself and others ) similarly situated, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) Zenith Financial Network, Inc., ) ) Defendant. ) Introduction Case No. :-cv-000-nvw PLAINTIFF S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT S MOTION TO DISMISS (AND TO COMPEL ARBITRATION) From the outset, Zenith Financial Network, Inc. s ( Defendant ) request to enforce a purported agreement to arbitrate pursuant to Section and of the Federal Arbitration Act, see Doc. at,, seems quite duplicitous as the agreement at issue makes abundantly clear that federal law does not apply to this Agreement, see Doc. - at, and that [n]either this Agreement nor Lender is subject to the laws of any state of the United States of America. See id. at. This is especially true given that the drafter of the purported agreement to arbitrate an entity that is not a party to this matter, and to whom Defendant does not establish a documented connection, see infra, Argument, Sections I- Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

2 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 II. appears to have disclaimed the application of federal law in an attempt to avoid the federal Truth in Lending Act s reach. See Doc. - at. Ignoring, however, that Defendant should be estopped from seeking to compel arbitration pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act ( FAA ) where the purported agreement on which Defendant bases its request disclaims the applicability of federal law, this Court must consider three separate and distinct issues in addressing Defendant s pending motion:. A party seeking to compel arbitration must show that there exists a valid arbitration agreement, and that the agreement encompasses the dispute at issue. Here, Defendant not only fails to submit admissible evidence establishing the existence of a valid arbitration agreement, but the very terms of the purported agreement at issue even if it is admissible show that the agreement does not govern Plaintiff s claims. Should this Court therefore compel arbitration despite that Defendant does not submit a clear agreement to arbitrate?. A non-party to an agreement, who seeks to enforce one of the agreement s provisions, must prove a valid transfer by which it acquired the rights to which it would like to avail itself. Here, Defendant is not a signatory to the purported agreement to arbitrate. Instead, it is a third-party debt collector acting on behalf of the supposed purchaser of the subject debt, which allegedly arose from a loan Plaintiff obtained from a creditor to whom Defendant does not establish a documented connection. What s more, Defendant fails to explain a gap in the chain of title regarding the purported agreement of which it seeks to take advantage. Has Defendant therefore met its burden to prove that it is entitled to enforce the arbitration provision at issue?. Because an agreement to arbitrate is as integral a term of a contract as any other, where an agreed upon forum is not available there exists no further promise to arbitrate in another forum. Here, the purported agreement to arbitrate requires that [a]rbitration shall be conducted in the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Nation. The Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Nation, however, neither conducts consumer arbitrations, nor does it have any consumer dispute rules. Should this Court therefore dismiss Plaintiff s claims pursuant to an alleged agreement to arbitrate in an unavailable forum? Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

3 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 Argument I. Defendant fails to establish the existence of a valid agreement to arbitrate Plaintiff s claims. A party seeking to compel arbitration must first show that there exists a valid arbitration agreement. Cox v. Ocean View Hotel Corp., F.d, (th Cir. 00). Specifically, it bears the burden of establishing the existence of an agreement to arbitrate by a preponderance of the evidence, just as the party seeking relief under any other alleged contract has the burden of proving that contract s existence. Burgess v. Qwest Corp., F. Supp. d, 0 (D. Or. 00) (internal quotation omitted). And if the party seeking to compel arbitration can demonstrate the existence of a valid arbitration agreement, it must then prove that the agreement encompasses the dispute at issue. Cox, F.d at. Here, Defendant does neither. A. Defendant fails to submit evidence sufficient to establish a valid arbitration agreement. The purported agreement to arbitrate that Defendant submits in connection with its motion to dismiss is nothing more than an unsigned and unauthenticated document that Defendant suggests may, upon information and belief, see Doc. at, constitute an agreement between Plaintiff and a non-party to this matter. Indeed, although Defendant states, without qualification, that the purported agreement is a signed Agreement with Western Sky, see Doc. at, it most certainly is not. And a simple review of the document itself, see Doc. -, makes this abundantly clear. In fact, Defendant, by way of its counsel, actually concedes as much: Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

4 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 Doc. at,. Upon information and belief, the fourth page of Exhibit B requires the borrower to acknowledge the borrower read and understood the Arbitration Section of the Note and to agree to be bound to the terms and conditions. Upon information and belief, the fourth page of Exhibit B requires the borrower to acknowledge they have read all of the terms and conditions of the Note and Disclosure Statement and agree to be bound thereto. It continues, the execution of the note shall have the same legal force and effect as a paper contract. Upon information and belief, the fifth page of Exhibit B requires the borrower to acknowledge the payment collection procedure of the lender. In other words, Defendant does not even contend that it submits an admissible agreement to arbitrate in connection with its motion to dismiss. Rather, it suggests that the single document on which it bases its pending request could, upon information and belief, somehow, someway, have the same legal force and effect as a paper contract. But because this Court must consider Defendant s request to compel arbitration against the backdrop of the same standard that it would use to determine a motion for summary judgment under Rule, see Perry v. NorthCentral Univ., Inc., CV-0--PCT-PGR, 0 WL, at * (D. Ariz. Sept., 0) (collecting cases), Defendant s hope that the purported agreement to arbitrate at issue is legally binding fails to satisfy the burden that Defendant is required to meet. But even if Defendant s counsel s statements were not based on information and belief, neither he, nor one of Defendant s employees, can properly authenticate the purported agreement to arbitrate; a Western Sky Financial, LLC ( Western Sky ) employee must do so. It therefore follows that Defendant s President s statement that [t]he attached Agreement in Exhibit B is a true and accurate copy of the original of said Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

5 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 Agreement, which was produced and maintained in the ordinary course of business, carries with it little, if any weight. This is because Defendant s President does not aver that he has any knowledge of Western Sky s record keeping processes and procedures. See Doc. at -. Tellingly, district courts to have considered requests to compel arbitration under nearly identical circumstances have refused them for this very reason: A review of Minford s declaration demonstrates that defendants have failed to lay the requisite foundation for admission of Exhibits A through F. Minford does not claim to be knowledgeable in the record keeping procedures of any of the non-defendant entities.... Based on this record, it is clear that Minford lacks personal knowledge of the procedure used to create and maintain Exhibits A through F, and he is not capable of testifying as a qualified witness under Rule 0(). See Reese, F.d at 0. The court therefore declines to admit Exhibits A through F as records of regularly conducted business activity, and will not consider them in ruling on defendants motion. Webb v. Midland Credit Mgmt., Inc., No. C, 0 WL 00, at * (N.D. Ill. May, 0); see also Matute v. Main Street Acquisition Corp., No. -CV-, 0 WL 0, at * (S.D. Fla. Oct., 0) (denying the defendant s motion to compel arbitration because the proffered arbitration agreement was not properly authenticated, and noting that the court s decision in Webb is quite compelling ); Henggeler v. Brumbaugh & Quandahl, P.C., LLO, F. Supp. d 0, (D. Neb. 0) ( The court finds Midland has not shown that a valid agreement to arbitrate exists.... On this record, the court finds there is a failure of proof with respect to a valid arbitration agreement. The court has not been provided with any signed credit card application, credit card agreement or Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

6 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of with the affidavit of any person with personal knowledge that Henggeler had signed such an agreement. ). Without more, because Defendant does not introduce a valid agreement to arbitrate, this Court should deny Defendants motion to compel arbitration. See Davis v. Nordstrom, Inc., F.d 0 (th Cir. 0) (explaining that arbitration is a product of contract, that parties are not required to arbitrate their disagreements unless they have agreed to do so, and that a contract to arbitrate will not be inferred absent a clear agreement ). 0 0 All of this presupposes that the Western Sky Loan Agreement which provides for a.% annual percentage rate, see Doc. - at in and of itself, can be enforced. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau recently suggested that in Arizona it cannot be: The CFPB s complaint alleges that defendants CashCall, WS Funding, Delbert, and Reddam have violated the Consumer Financial Protection Act s prohibitions on unfair, deceptive, and abusive acts and practices. The Bureau s investigation showed that the high-cost loans violated either licensing requirements or interest-rate caps or both in at least eight states: Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Indiana, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, and North Carolina. Under statutes in at least these eight states, any obligation to pay such loans was rendered void or otherwise nullified in whole or in part by law. Therefore, the defendants are collecting money that consumers do not owe. (emphasis added). Importantly, in Arizona, a void agreement, as opposed to a voidable agreement, is unenforceable. See Princess Plaza Partners v. State, Ariz., (Ct. App. ) ( A voidable agreement would be one subject to rescission or ratification whereas a void agreement would be incapable of ratification or disaffirmance. ). Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

7 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 B. Even assuming the purported agreement that Defendant submits is admissible, Defendant fails to show that the agreement governs Plaintiff s claims. The purported agreement to arbitrate at issue provides that [a]ny Arbitration will be limited to the dispute between yourself and the Holder of the Note.... Doc. - at. It then continues: A Dispute is any controversy or claim between you and Western Sky or the Holder of the Note. Id. Quite significantly, Defendant is neither Western Sky Financial, LLC, nor the holder of the note. Instead, Defendant is a third-party debt collector for an entity that it characterizes as the purchaser of the subject debt, which allegedly arose from a loan Plaintiff supposedly obtained from Western Sky: Ms. Bopp defaulted on the Western Sky Financial loan account, number, which was then purchased by and assigned to National Credit Adjusters ( NCA ). Sometime after that, NCA placed Ms. Bopp s, [sic] with Zenith for servicing and collection, pursuant to an agreement between NCA and Zenith for such services. Doc. at, -. And Defendant s argument that it is effectively the holder of the Western Sky Loan Agreement, see Doc. at, because there exists a servicing and collection agreement between NCA and Defendant, see Doc. at,, does not hold water as Defendant has not submitted any evidence that it is an agent of NCA. Noteworthy, declarations of an agent alone as to his agency are insufficient to prove agency.... Maynard v. Hall, Ariz., (). Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

8 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 So according to Defendant s own description of the relevant entities, it could not, per the specific terms of the arbitration provision included in the Western Sky Loan Agreement, invoke it. And common sense dictates the same, as Plaintiff s claims are not directed to Western Sky, or the Holder of the Note, but to Defendant a third party debt collector. See Doc.. Worth mentioning, courts across the country have taken care to distinguish the type of claims subject to an arbitration agreement like the one Defendant submits, from the type of claims that Plaintiff includes in her class action complaint. See, e.g. Peterson v. United Accts. Inc., F.d, (th Cir. ) (explaining that circumstances giving rise to an original debt are separate and distinct from a defendant s debt collection practices); Hortado v. Tam Fin. Corp., No. EP-0-CA-0-FM, 00 WL, at * (W.D. Tex. June, 00) (noting that all courts to have considered the issue have concluded that a creditor s claim for payment of a debt is not logically related to a debtor s FDCPA claim based on improper debt collection practices); Barcena v. Tam Fin. Corp., No. EP-0-CA- 000-KC, 00 WL, at * (W.D. Tex. May, 00) (finding that a claim to recover debt arises out of aggregate core operative facts distinct from those underlying an FDCPA claim); Hart v. Clayton-Parker & Assocs., F. Supp., - (D. Az. ) ( [P]laintiff's FDCPA claim relates to the alleged use of abusive debt collection practices, while defendant s counterclaim encompasses a private duty under state law [requiring] a broad proof of facts establishing the existence and performance of a contract, the validity of the contract s provisions, a breach of contract by the plaintiff, and monetary damages resulting from the breach. ); Strange v. Wexler, F. Supp., (N.D. Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

9 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 Ill. ) (plaintiff s liability for a debt is immaterial to claim that debt collector violated FDCPA); Kolker v. Duke City Collection Agency, 0 F. Supp., (D.N.M. 0) (consumer s liability for underlying debt is irrelevant and immaterial to whether debt collector is liable for conduct that violates FDCPA). Of particular note, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania concisely summarized the fundamental difference between claims that may fall within the scope of the purported agreement to arbitrate at issue, and the claims that Plaintiff includes in her class action complaint: Although defendants right to payment from plaintiff is certainly factually linked to the fairness of defendants collection practices there being no attempted collection without an alleged debt a cause of action on the debt arises out of events different from the cause of action for abuse in collecting. The former centers on evidence regarding the existence of a contract, the failure to perform on a contract, or other circumstances leading to the creation of a valid debt. The latter centers on evidence regarding the improprieties and transgressions, as defined by the FDCPA, in the procedures used to collect the debt, regardless of the debt s validity. Ayres v. Nat l Credit Mgmt. Corp., No. 0-, WL, at * (E.D. Pa. Apr., ). Accordingly, and because [d]etermining whether a claim falls within an arbitration agreement s scope is a matter of contract interpretation and, thus, a question of law for the court, Cnty. of El Paso, Tex. v. Jones, EP-0-CV-00-KC, 00 WL 0, at * (W.D. Tex. Jan., 00), this Court should refuse Defendant s request to compel arbitration in this matter. Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

10 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page 0 of 0 0 II. Even if Defendant established that the purported agreement to arbitrate is valid it did not it fails to show that it is entitled to enforce the agreement. Defendant is not a signatory to the purported agreement to arbitrate. Instead, it is a third-party debt collector acting on behalf of the supposed purchaser of the subject debt, which allegedly arose from a loan Plaintiff obtained from Western Sky. Doc. at. Stated otherwise, Defendant works for a debt buyer, who it claims purchased the subject debt from Western Sky. See id. And out of this factual scenario, Defendant asserts that it is entitled to enforce an arbitration provision found in the Western Sky Loan Agreement because it has an interest in the agreement, and is therefore entitled to the benefit of the arbitration provisions. See Doc. at. Doc. at. Specifically, Defendant reasons: The Agreement states that Western Sky may transfer, sell or assign the Agreement, and any amounts owed on the Obligation. The Agreement specifically states the Arbitration provision benefits are binding upon Western Sky, Plaintiff, and any assigns and related third parties. NCA purchased the subject debt and placed it for collections with Zenith. The Agreement specifically states that the arbitration provision applies to any controversy or claim between you and Western Sky or the holder of the Note. (emphasis added) The Section defining arbitration continues by defining the holder as the thencurrent holder s employees, officers, directors, attorneys, affiliated companies, predecessors, and assigns, as well as any marketing, servicing, and collection representatives and agents. (emphasis added) Therefore, Zenith, as NCA s servicer and collection agent, falls within the definition of the holder of the Note and clearly is entitled to arbitration. But even if Defendant could be deemed the holder it cannot, see supra, Argument, Section I.B. it presents absolutely no proof that Western Sky ever transferred Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss - 0

11 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 the right to arbitrate or for the matter, ever sold Plaintiff s account to NCA. In fact, Defendant does not attach a single document to its motion to dismiss that purports to show a transfer, sale, or assignment from Western Sky to NCA. See, generally, Docs., -. This is quite important as a non-party to an agreement, who seeks to enforce one of the agreement s provisions as a subsequent owner or holder, must prove a valid transfer by which it acquired the rights to which it would like to avail itself. And to make this showing, it must submit evidence of an assignment or transfer and the subject matter of the assignment must be described sufficiently to make it capable of being readily identified. Klass v. Fid. & Guar. Life Ins. Co., No. CIV0--PHX-RCB, 00 WL, at * (D. Ariz. Mar., 00); see, e.g. Colville v. Koch, F.d, (th Cir. ) (refusing a party s request because [t]here is no proof of assignment or transfer of the note, and the burden of proving the assignment was on the party seeking relief). Therefore, the unexplained gap in the chain of title regarding the purported agreement at issue means that Defendant has not met its burden to establish that it is entitled to enforce the arbitration provision found in it even assuming, for the sake of argument, that the Western Sky Loan Agreement is valid. III. Even if Defendant demonstrated that it is entitled to enforce the purported agreement to arbitrate at issue it did not there exists no forum in which to arbitrate this matter, and thus no agreement to arbitrate. [A]n agreement to arbitrate before a particular forum is as integral a term of a contract as any other, which courts must enforce. Wall Street Assocs., L.P., v. Becker Paribas, Inc., F. Supp., (S.D.N.Y. ), aff d, F.d (d Cir. ). This is because [w]hen parties designate a specific arbitral forum, such designation has Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

12 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 wide-ranging substantive implications that may affect, inter alia, the arbitrator-selection process, the law, procedures, and rules that govern the arbitration, the enforcement of the arbitral award, and the cost of the arbitration. Singleton v. Grade A Market, Inc., 0 F. Supp. d, 0 (D. Conn. 00). Accordingly, where an agreed upon forum is not available, there exists no further promise to arbitrate in another forum. See In re Salomon Inc. Shareholders Derivative Litig. Civ. 00 (RRP), F.d, (d Cir. ) ( When the NYSE so refuses, there is no further promise to arbitrate in another forum. ); QuickClick Loans, LLC v. Russell, 0 Ill. App. d, (Ill. App. Ct. 0) ( Although the parties agreed to arbitration, the exclusive administrators, as outlined in the Arbitration Agreement, are not available to arbitrate the matter. Therefore, external events to the parties agreement have foreclosed the arbitration of the parties claims, and thus the circuit court could not enforce the Arbitration Agreement. ); Alan v. Superior Court, Cal. App. th,, Cal. Rptr. d, (00) ( Thus, if an SRO here, the NASD, the forum selected by the brokers declines to hear the matter, the dispute is to be tried in court. ). Likewise, courts may not circumvent the parties contractual designations and compel arbitration in an alternative forum by appointing substitute arbitrators. See Dover Ltd. v. A.B. Watley, Inc., No. 0 CIV. (FM), 00 WL 0, at * (S.D.N.Y. Oct., 00) ( Section nevertheless is inapplicable when the parties have specified an exclusive arbitral forum, but that forum is no longer available. ). Simply, a court cannot draw a new contract under the guise of enforcing a provision to arbitrate. Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

13 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 Here, the purported agreement to arbitrate is subject solely to the exclusive laws and jurisdiction of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Cheyenne River Indian Reservation. Doc. - at. The corresponding Choice of Arbitrator Clause reads: Id. at. Any party to a dispute, including related third parties, may send the other party written notice by certified mail return receipt requested at the address appearing at the top of this Loan Agreement of their intent to arbitrate and setting forth the subject of the dispute along with the relief requested, even if a lawsuit has been filed. Arbitration shall be conducted in the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Nation by your choice of either (i) a Tribal Elder, or (ii) a panel of three () members of the Tribal Council, and shall be conducted in accordance with the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Nation's consumer dispute rules and the terms of this Agreement. The problem with this clause is that the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Nation neither conducts consumer arbitrations, nor does it have any consumer dispute rules; thus, the agreed upon forum is unavailable, and the related agreement to arbitrate is non-existent: Plaintiff argues that the agreed upon arbitral forum is not available. As described below, the Court agrees.... * * * Accordingly, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has provided new evidence showing that the agreed upon arbitral forum is not available, and that reconsideration is appropriate. * * * Second, Plaintiff contends that he has obtained new evidence showing that the Tribe does not have any consumer dispute rules. * * * At the August, 0 hearing, CashCall conceded that, while the Tribe has rules concerning consumer relations e.g., usury statutes Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

14 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 it does not have any consumer dispute rules. Without such rules, it is obvious that arbitration cannot be conducted in accordance with [Tribal] consumer dispute rules as required by the arbitration agreement. Accordingly, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has provided new evidence demonstrating that ) the arbitral forum does not exist, and ) rules governing the purported forum do not exist Moreover, for the reasons stated in the April Order, the selection of the Tribe as arbitrator was integral to the agreement to arbitrate. Because the Tribe is not available to arbitrate the parties claims in this action, the arbitration agreement is void. Inetianbor v. CashCall, Inc., F. Supp. d 0, 0-0 (S.D. Fla. 0) (analyzing a Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Nation arbitration provision nearly identical, if not identical, to that now at issue). What s more, even if the agreed upon arbitration forum is available it is not Defendant does not suggest how or why the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Nation has jurisdiction over Plaintiff. See Plains Commerce Bank v. Long Family Land & Cattle Co., U.S., (00) ( Indian tribes, however, generally lack legal authority over people who are not tribal members. ). Potentially more important, Defendant likewise fails to suggest how or why the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Nation has jurisdiction over Western Sky and by relation, its successors and assigns. See Heldt v. Payday Fin., LLC, CIV -0-RAL, 0 WL 0, at * (D.S.D. Mar., 0) ( As noted in PayDay I, PayDay Financial LLC and Western Sky Financial LLC, for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, would be deemed citizens of the state of South Dakota. ). Not surprisingly, the Heldt court noted that it is skeptical that South Dakota limited liability companies merely licensed with the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe become tribal Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

15 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 members and thereby can invoke tribal court jurisdiction over the consumers under the language of the consumer loan agreements. Id. at. Conclusion As John Davies wrote in : A man cannot eat his cake and have it still. In line with this principle, Defendant should be estopped from using a federal district court to invoke an arbitration clause found in an agreement that disclaims the applicability of federal law. No matter, Defendant fails to meet its burden in connection with its motion to compel arbitration. In particular, Defendant fails to submit evidence sufficient to establish a valid agreement to arbitrate. Defendant also fails to show even if the purported agreement is admissible that it governs Plaintiff s claims, or that Defendant is entitled to enforce the purported agreement. And in like fashion, Defendant fails to demonstrate that there exists a forum in which the parties could arbitrate Plaintiff s claims, even if her claims were subject to arbitration. Each of these failures, in and of themselves, is fatal to Defendant s request that this Court dismiss Plaintiff s claims. Consequently, this Court should deny Defendant s pending motion. Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -

16 Case :-cv-000-spl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Russell S. Thompson IV Russell S. Thompson IV E. Southern Ave. D0- Mesa, AZ 0 Thompson Consumer Law Group, PLLC Toll Free: () - ext. Direct: (0) - Facsimile: () - rthompson@consumerlawinfo.com CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically via the Court s CM/ECF system on September, 0, which will provide notice to Defendant s counsel of record: William R. Mettler, Esq. S. Price Road Chandler, Arizona (0) 0-0 wrmettler@wrmettlerlaw.com /s/christopher Bruner Christopher Bruner 0 Plaintiff s Response to Defendant s Motion to Dismiss -