The FACTA states that “no merchant shall print more than the last 5 digits of the card number or the expiration date upon any receipt provided to the cardholder.” In Vasquez-Torres v. Stubhub, Inc. the District Court for the Central District of California held that these requirements apply to receipts viewed or printed from one’s home computer in connection with an internet sale. In the court’s opinion, the display of information on the plaintiff’s computer screen satisfied a definition of “print” from Webster’s Dictionary: “to make an impression upon.” But in Smith v. Zazzle and Smith v. Underarmour, the Southern District of Florida reached the opposite conclusion, finding the FACTA truncation requirements inapplicable to internet receipts. The Florida district court granted the internet retailers’ motions to dismiss in both cases, holding that the statutory term “print” as used in FACTA meant the imprinting of something on paper or other tangible surface. Accordingly, in this court’s view, the internet receipt that was automatically displayed on a computer screen was not subject to FACTA’s truncation requirement. The Zazzle court explained that FACTA uses the phrases “point of the sale” and “any cash register or other machine or device” to describe the type of printing that is prohibited, thereby evincing an intent that the term “print” refer to the merchant’s imprinting of information on a paper receipt from a device such as a “cash register” at the point of the sale. Zazzle and Underarmour followed recent similar rulings in the Southern District of Florida in Grabein v. Jupiterimages Corp. and Haslam v. Federated Dep’t Stores, Inc.