True Health Chiropractic Inc v. McKesson Corporation
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:13-cv-02219
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In True Health Chiropractic v. McKesson, Judge Gilliam entered summary judgment against the Online Fax Services Class, finding it had no legal claim under the cited FCC ruling.
The ruling directly affected the Online Fax Services Class and the plaintiffs’ claims on behalf of that class. The order does not state that it resolved the claims of the Stand-Alone Fax Machine Class.
What happened
True Health Chiropractic Inc. and other plaintiffs sued McKesson Corporation and other defendants under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The court had divided the certified class into a Stand-Alone Fax Machine Class and an Online Fax Services Class after an FCC ruling addressed online fax services.
The plaintiffs argued that the court should not decide the online-fax class’s claims until class members had received notice and had time to exclude themselves. They chose to rely on arguments they had already made, and the court noted that the notice period had since ended.
Judge Gilliam concluded that the Online Fax Services Class had no legal claim under the FCC ruling and that the plaintiffs had had a full and fair opportunity to present their arguments. He entered summary judgment against that class.
The detailed version
- True Health Chiropractic Inc v. McKesson Corporation · No. 4:13-cv-02219
- Haywood Gilliam
- Aug. 13, 2021
Background
The defendants moved to decertify the class after the Federal Communications Commission’s Consumer and Government Affairs Bureau ruled that an “online fax service” is not a “telephone facsimile machine” under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The court denied the motion to decertify but modified the class definition to create a Stand-Alone Fax Machine Class and an Online Fax Services Class.
The court later indicated that summary judgment should be entered against the Online Fax Services Class as a matter of law based on its earlier analysis. Summary judgment is a decision that resolves a claim when the court determines there is no legally viable claim or no genuine dispute requiring trial.
Parties’ Positions
The court gave the plaintiffs an opportunity to identify reasons why summary judgment should not be entered against the Online Fax Services Class. The plaintiffs responded that they wished to rely on arguments previously made in connection with the decertification motion and their motion seeking summary judgment for the online-fax class.
The plaintiffs also argued that the court should not decide the merits of a certified class’s claims until class members had received notice and the deadline to request exclusion from the class had passed. Updated notice was provided, and the opt-out deadline passed on April 20, 2021. The court stated that the plaintiffs’ arguments had been preserved for the record.
Ruling
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. maintained the view that the Online Fax Services Class had no cause of action as a matter of law under the FCC’s ruling in Amerifactors. The court also found that the plaintiffs had received a full and fair opportunity to present their arguments. It therefore entered summary judgment against the Online Fax Services Class.
The order does not state that it entered judgment against the Stand-Alone Fax Machine Class or resolve the entire case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.