California Laws|Section 1812.702.

[under a “plain reading,” “Section 1812.702 … makes any violation of Section 1812.700 … a violation of the Rosenthal Act, but does not at the same time incorporate the Rosenthal Act’s definition of the ‘debt collector.’ ”].) The Court notes, however, that the collection letter at issue states in bold type that it is from a debt collector. Defendant is therefore not entitled to summary judgment on the ground that it is not a “debt collector” under the Rosenthal Act. C.

Guzman’s claim is styled a Rosenthal Act claim because under Civil Code section 1812.702, a violation of the Consumer Collection Notice requirements is considered a violation of the Rosenthal Act. B. Procedural Plaintiff filed her complaint on February 2, 2018. Defendant answered and filed a motion for summary judgment, or, alternatively, summary adjudication of the class claim. In an order filed on April 18, 2019, the Court (Judge Walsh) denied Mandarich’s motion. Ms.

Plaintiff’s claim is styled a Rosenthal Act claim because under Civil Code section 1812.702, a violation of the Consumer Collection Notice requirements is considered a violation of the Rosenthal Act. Plaintiff filed her complaint on February 2, 2018. Defendant answered and filed a motion for summary judgment, or, alternatively, summary adjudication of the class claim.