With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". (Id.). The court finds that DIRECTV has adequately alleged that Thompson intercepted and used its electronic communication in violation of § 2511. Further, the court finds that Thompson, by his default, has admitted these allegations and admitted his liability for a violation of § 2511. 2. Count Three: 18 U.S.C. § 2512 Count Three of the Complaint alleges a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2512. Count Three attempts to state a private cause of action pursuant to § 2520(a) for an alleged violation of § 2512(l)(b). However, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently addressed this very issue and held that § 2520(a) does not provide a private cause of action against a person who possesses a device in violation of § 2512(1)(b). See DirecTV, Inc. v. Treworgy, 373 F.3d 1124 (11th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). Indeed, this court has published several

A: holding that section 4625bc does not create a private right of action for money damages
B: holding that 18 usc  2512 does not create a private right of action against one who merely possesses a device to pirate satellite signals and questioning whether a case or controversy would exist by possession of a pirate access device alone
C: holding that a private right of action exists
D: recognizing private right of action
B.