On July 15, 2015, a California federal judge dismissed with prejudice a putative class complaint for failure to allege facts suggesting that Defendant's system was capable of acting as an ATDS. Flores v. Adir Int’l, LLC, No. 15-00076, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92176, at *6-*7 (C.D. Cal. July 15, 2015). The Court held that allegations of “automation” such as the use of a generic template and immediate response are insufficient to satisfy the definition of an ATDS. And, what is more, the Court found that the “Plaintiff's own allegations suggest[ed] direct targeting that is inconsistent with the sort of random or sequential number generation required for an ATDS.” Specifically, the Court pointed to Plaintiff’s allegations that the Defendant was a debt collector that was attempting to collect on a specific debt, and that each allegedly offending text message included the same reference number.