4:23-cv-00061
E.D. Va.Aug 1, 2024Background
- Plaintiff Laura Ackerman, on behalf of a class, sued Fuego Leads, LLC, Millennium Health Advisors, and Infinix Media, LLC for alleged violations of the TCPA and Virginia Telephone Privacy Protection Act.
- Fuego moved to dismiss the case for lack of personal jurisdiction, filing an affidavit to support its position; Ackerman did not submit opposing evidence.
- The Court denied Fuego’s motion to dismiss, finding that Fuego’s affidavit did not contradict essential jurisdictional allegations in the amended complaint.
- Fuego filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing the Court erred by denying its motion despite an unrebutted affidavit.
- The Court reviewed the matter on briefing, found no clear error of law or manifest injustice, and denied reconsideration.
- Fuego’s deadline to answer the amended complaint was reinstated following the decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Personal jurisdiction standard | Allegations in the complaint sufficed unless rebutted with relevant evidence | Plaintiff needed to rebut Fuego’s affidavit with evidence to survive motion | Plaintiff need only respond if essential allegations are controverted; Fuego's evidence didn't do this |
| Sufficiency of defendant’s affidavit | Allegations of vicarious liability and call authorization support jurisdiction | Affidavit denying non-essential facts suffices to defeat jurisdiction | Affidavit did not address essential jurisdiction facts; did not defeat jurisdiction |
| Application of prima facie standard | Proper to apply prima facie standard as discovery and evidence was incomplete | Preponderance of evidence required at this stage | Prima facie standard was proper; preponderance standard not required at this procedural stage |
| Clear error or manifest injustice | Court’s denial of dismissal and use of standard was correct | Denial was legal error and allowed undue burden on defendant | No clear error or injustice; reconsideration denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Wolf v. Richmond Cnty. Hosp. Auth., 745 F.2d 904 (4th Cir. 1984) (Describes the standard for considering affidavits in personal jurisdiction decisions)
- Grayson v. Anderson, 816 F.3d 262 (4th Cir. 2016) (Explains tiers of evidence and standards for jurisdictional challenges)
- Combs v. Bakker, 886 F.2d 673 (4th Cir. 1989) (Describes proof burden at different stages for jurisdiction)
- Dowless v. Warren-Rupp Houdailles, Inc., 800 F.2d 1305 (4th Cir. 1986) (Outlines plaintiff’s burden in making a prima facie case for jurisdiction)