conclusion. The Court, too, will dispose of this issue in brief fashion. 45 .While the Court holds that Defendants debt collection practices constitute violations of the FDCPA and the OCSPA in this case, it does not mean to suggest that a violation of the FDCPA is a violation of the OCSPA in all cases. Ohio courts have not spoken in unison on the issue of federal regulatory statute incorporation. See United Research, Inc., 482 N.E.2d at 1261-62 (implying that the distant forum prohibition of the FDCPA is incorporated into Ohio Rev.Code § 1345.02(C)); Scandinavian Health Spa, Inc., 1986 WL 363150, at *3 (finding that "[a] violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692d is a violation of O.R.C. § 1345.02(A)”); hut see Celebrezze v. Fred Godard Ford, Inc., 27 Ohio App.3d 301, 500 N.E.2d 881, 883-84 (1985) (<HOLDING>). 46 . Section 1345.11(A) provides that "if a
holding no violation of the travel act holding that a violation of the truth in lending act is not a violation perse of the ocspa holding that violation of state law was not a per se constitutional violation holding a violation of the travel act holding that in determining whether a discovery violation warrants the sanction of exclusion of evidence a court must look to whether the violation was substantial the timing of the violation the reason for the violation the degree of prejudice to the parties whether such prejudice may be cured by a postponement and the desirability of a continuance