FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DAVID TOURGEMAN, No. 12-56783
Plaintiff-Appellant,
D.C. No.
v. 3:08-cv-01392-
CAB-NLS
COLLINS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.,
DBA Precision Recovery Analytics,
Inc., a Texas corporation; NELSON & ORDER
KENNARD, a partnership; PARAGON
WAY, INC.; COLLINS FINANCIAL
SERVICES USA, INC.,
Defendants-Appellees,
and
DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES, LP,
Defendant.
Filed October 31, 2014
Before: Jerome Farris and Andrew D. Hurwitz, Circuit
Judges, and Paul L. Friedman, District Judge.*
*
The Honorable Paul L. Friedman, District Judge, U.S. District Court
for the District of Columbia, sitting by designation.
2 TOURGEMAN V. COLLINS FINANCIAL SERVS.
ORDER
The opinion filed June 25, 2014 is AMENDED as
follows:
1. At page 4 of the slip opinion, the following sentence is
deleted:
We now reverse and hold that judgment
should be entered for Tourgeman.
and replaced with:
We now reverse.
2. At page 24 of the slip opinion, the following sentence is
deleted:
Accordingly, the appellant is entitled to
judgment on his claims against Paragon Way
under subsections 1692e(2) and e(10).
3. At page 30 of the slip opinion, the following sentence is
deleted:
These conclusions are sufficient to warrant
both reversal of the judgment granted to
Nelson & Kennard and entry of judgment in
favor of Tourgeman.
and replaced with:
TOURGEMAN V. COLLINS FINANCIAL SERVS. 3
These conclusions are sufficient to warrant
reversal of the judgment granted to Nelson &
Kennard.
4. At pages 30–31 of the slip opinion, the following
sentence is deleted:
For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that
the judgment of the district court granting
judgment to Collins, Paragon Way, and
Nelson & Kennard must be reversed, and that
judgment should instead be entered for
Tourgeman against Paragon Way and Nelson
& Kennard.
and replaced with:
For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that
the judgment of the district court granting
judgment to Collins, Paragon Way, and
Nelson & Kennard must be reversed.
5. At page 31 of the slip opinion, the following sentence is
deleted:
We express no view regarding whether
Tourgeman is entitled to judgment against
Collins itself, as Tourgeman’s claims against
that entity were based on a theory of vicarious
liability that was neither decided by the
district court nor briefed on this appeal.
With this amendment, Judges Hurwitz and Friedman have
voted to deny the petition for rehearing. Judge Farris did not
4 TOURGEMAN V. COLLINS FINANCIAL SERVS.
vote. Judge Hurwitz voted to deny the petition for rehearing
en banc, Judge Friedman so recommends, and Judge Farris
made no recommendation.
The full court has been advised of the petition for
rehearing en banc and no active judge has requested a vote on
whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35.
The petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en
banc, filed August 13, 2014, are DENIED. No further
petition for rehearing and/or petition for rehearing en banc
may be filed.