With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". or debt collection practices, defendant’s activities fall outside the FDCPA’s general provisions); Overton, No. 1:07-ev-0274-DFHTAB, 2007 WL 2413026, at *4 (S.D.Ind. Aug. 21, 2007) (recognizing majority position that party whose activities are limited to enforcement of security interests is not subject to all FDCPA requirements, and stating, “[i]f a person invokes judicial remedies only to enforce the security interest in property, then the effort is not subject to the FDCPA (other than § 1692f(6) and § 1692i(a))[,][b]ut if the person is also seeking additional relief, such as a personal judgment against the borrower, then the FDCPA applies.”) (collecting cases); Chomilo v. Shapiro, Nordmeyer & Zielke, LLP, Civ. No. 06-3103 (RHK/AJB), 2007 WL 2695795, at *6 (D.Minn. Sept.12, 2007) (<HOLDING>); Acosta v. Campbell, No. 6:04CV761 ORL28DAB,

A: holding that a debt collectors filing of a lawsuit on a debt that appears to be timebarred  is an unfair and unconscionable means of collecting the debt
B: holding that law firm executing nonjudicial foreclosure proceeding was enforcing a security interest rather than collecting a debt and hence fell outside the ambit of the fdcpa except for the provisions of section 1692f6
C: holding that the defendants actions in filing judicial foreclosure proceeding against mortgagor amounted to debt collection activity under the fdcpa and distinguishing decisions involving pursuit of nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings under a deed of trust from those in which a defendant has pursued judicial foreclosure proceedings which included seeking judgment on a note  by filing a lawsuit in state court
D: holding that back rent is debt under the fdcpa
B.