Hoffman v. Reagan Gold Group LLC
3:24-cv-06003
| W.D. Wash. | Jun 20, 2025Background
- Mark Hoffman filed a class action suit against Reagan Gold Group LLC, alleging unauthorized telemarketing calls and texts in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and Washington state laws.
- Hoffman's phone number was on the national do-not-call registry for over five years before receiving about 35 communications from Reagan Gold, which he claims promoted gold investment services.
- Reagan Gold was served on December 10, 2024, entered default in January 2025, but retained counsel who appeared in late February 2025.
- Defendant moved to set aside entry of default, asserting excusable neglect rather than culpable conduct and claiming meritorious defenses under the TCPA.
- The Court assessed whether the default should be vacated based on the Falk factors: culpable conduct, meritorious defense, and prejudice to plaintiff.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether delay was due to culpable conduct | Defendant delayed intentionally, possibly to gain tactical advantage | Acted in good faith, was seeking settlement and counsel | No culpable conduct by Defendant |
| Whether Defendant alleged sufficient meritorious defenses | No valid defenses; calls/texts were unsolicited and violated the law | Compliance with TCPA, consent, informational not marketing | Defendant met threshold for meritorious defenses |
| Whether vacating default would prejudice Plaintiff | Delay in litigation, potential discovery disruptions | No prejudice, short delay, minimal case activity | No prejudice found; setting aside default appropriate |
| Appropriateness of setting aside default under Rule 55(c) | Circumstances do not warrant relief | Good cause under Falk factors for vacating default | Motion to set aside default granted |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Aguilar, 782 F.3d 1101 (9th Cir. 2015) (describing factors for setting aside default)
- Falk v. Allen, 739 F.2d 461 (9th Cir. 1984) (setting out framework for vacating default)
- United States v. Signed Pers. Check No. 730 of Yubran S. Mesle, 615 F.3d 1085 (9th Cir. 2010) (clarifying culpable conduct for default)
- Chesbro v. Best Buy Stores, L.P., 705 F.3d 913 (9th Cir. 2012) (defining telemarketing under the TCPA)
- TCI Grp. Life Ins. Plan v. Knoebber, 244 F.3d 691 (9th Cir. 2001) (defining prejudice in the context of default)
- Hawaii Carpenters’ Tr. Funds v. Stone, 794 F.2d 508 (9th Cir. 1986) (threshold for meritorious defense to set aside default)