Circuit Judge Robert D. Sack


Read Full- Text Decision

Removed from state court, and transferred to the Southern District of New York, Geismann’s putative class suit alleged ZocDoc Inc.’s violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Geismann rejected ZocDoc’s offer of $6,000 in satisfaction of its individual claims. District court concluded that the settlement offer would have provided Geismann complete relief. It entered judgment in the amount, and under the terms of, the unaccepted offer and dismissed suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction as moot. Second Circuit—which under the Supreme Court’s decision in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, granted ZocDoc’s request to deposit a $6,100 check in satisfaction of judgment—vacated and remanded district court’s judgment. It concluded that in light of Campbell-Ewald, district court’s conclusion that Geismann’s claim was mooted by the amount and content of ZocDoc’s Rule 68 offer was incorrect. ZocDoc’s unsuccessful attempt to tender judgment notwithstanding, Geismann has not been compensated in satisfaction of its claim, which would require, at a minimum, acceptance of a valid offer. Even if the $6,100 deposit satisfied Geismann’s demand for monetary relief, it alone did not satisfy Geismann’s demand for injunctive relief.