******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.

*****************************************************************



Federal Communications Commission FCC 13-61
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Teresa Goldberg 
a/k/a Tammy Pocknett
d/b/a Software Training Company, Software 
Business Management, and Software Managing 
Systems
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
File No.:  EB-TCD-12-00000241
1
NAL/Acct. No.:  201232170004 
FRN:  0021522776
FORFEITURE ORDER
Adopted:  May 3, 2013 Released:  May 7, 2013
By the Commission: Commissioner McDowell not participating.
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Forfeiture Order (Order), we issue a forfeiture of $432,000 against Teresa 
Goldberg a/k/a Tammy Pocknett d/b/a Software Training Company, Software Business Management, and
Software Managing Systems (Teresa Goldberg d/b/a Software Training Company) for willful and 
repeated violations of Section 227(b)(1)(C) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Act), and 
Section 64.1200(a)(4) of the Commission’s rules,
2
by delivering 27 unsolicited advertisements, or “junk 
faxes,” to the telephone facsimile machines of 27 consumers.    
II. BACKGROUND
2. Congress enacted the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA) to address 
problems of abusive telemarketing, including unsolicited facsimile advertisements or “junk faxes.”
3
  As a 
result of the TCPA, Section 227(b)(1)(C) of the Act makes it “unlawful for any person within the United 
States, or any person outside the United States if the recipient is within the United States . . . to use any 
telephone facsimile machine, computer, or other device to send, to a telephone facsimile machine, an 
unsolicited advertisement.”
4
          
3. Pursuant to Section 503(b)(5) of the Act,
5
the Enforcement Bureau (Bureau) issued a junk 
                                                          
1
This case was formerly assigned the file number EB-10-TC-487. In January 2011, the Telecommunications
Consumers Division reassigned this case the number set forth in the caption.
2
See 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(C); 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(a)(4).  
3
Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, Pub. L. No. 102-243, 105 Stat. 2394 (codified as amended at 47 
U.S.C. § 227); see also Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-21, 119 Stat. 359 (2005).
4
47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(C).  The prohibition is subject to certain exceptions, such as if the sender has an “established 
business relationship” (EBR) with the recipient and the sender obtained the facsimile number from the recipient 
through voluntary communication in the context of an EBR, or from a directory, advertisement, or website through 
which the recipient voluntarily agreed to make its facsimile number available for public distribution.  In addition, the 
unsolicited ad must notify the recipient how to opt out of receiving future such ads, and do so in compliance with 
certain requirements.  The Commission adopted implementing rules.  47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(a)(4).
5
47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(5).
Federal Communications Commission FCC 13-61
2
fax citation to Teresa Goldberg d/b/a Software Training Company on December 20, 2010 in response to a 
consumer complaint alleging that Teresa Goldberg d/b/a Software Training Company had faxed 
unsolicited advertisements.
6
  On December 30, 2010, Software Training Company responded to the 
citation, claiming that the company was “no longer active or in business” and that it had “no plan or 
resources to start the company again.”
7
4. Subsequently, between February and September 2011, the Commission received 
complaints from consumers alleging that they had received unsolicited facsimile advertisements from
“Software Business Management” and “Software Managing Systems.”  On February 23, 2012, the 
Commission issued a Notice of Apparent Liability of Forfeiture (NAL) against Teresa Goldberg d/b/a 
Software Training Company in the amount of $432,000, finding that “‘Software Business Management’ 
and ‘Software Managing Systems’ are nothing more than names through which Teresa Goldberg d/b/a 
Software Training Company operates.”
8
  The February 2012 NAL ordered Teresa Goldberg d/b/a 
Software Training Company to pay the proposed forfeiture amount within thirty (30) days, submit 
evidence or arguments in response to the NAL to show that no forfeiture should be imposed, or show that 
some lesser amount should be assessed.
9
  Although the Bureau confirmed that Teresa Goldberg d/b/a 
Software Training Company received the February 2012 NAL by hand delivery, she has not paid the 
forfeiture or responded to the Commission.
10
  
III. DISCUSSION
5. Section 503(b)(2)(D) authorizes the Commission to assess a maximum forfeiture of 
$16,000 per violation against an entity such as Teresa Goldberg d/b/a Software Training Company.
11
  In 
exercising such authority, the Commission must consider “the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity 
of the violation and, with respect to the violator, the degree of culpability, any history of prior offenses, 
ability to pay, and such other matters as justice may require.”
12
    
6. Teresa Goldberg d/b/a Software Training Company did not respond to the February 2012 
NAL. We are, therefore, unaware of any mitigating circumstances to warrant a cancellation or reduction 
of the forfeiture penalty.  Accordingly, we affirm our findings in the February 2012 NAL that Teresa 
Goldberg d/b/a Software Training Company willfully and repeatedly violated Section 227(b)(1)(C) of the 
                                                          
6
Citation from Joshua P. Zeldis, Assistant Chief, Telecommunications Consumers Division, FCC Enforcement 
Bureau, to Software Training Company (Dec. 20, 2010) (on file in EB-TCD-00000241). 
7
Letter from Richard Goldberg, Software Training Company, to Federal Communications Commission (Dec. 30, 
2010) (on file in EB-TCD-00000241). 
8
Teresa Goldberg a/k/a Tammy Pocknett d/b/a Software Training Company, Software Business Management and
Software Managing Systems, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 27 FCC Rcd 2723, 2725 (2012) (February 
2012 NAL).
9
February 2012 NAL, 27 FCC Rcd at 2726, para. 15. 
10
The February 2012 NAL was served on Teresa Goldberg a/k/a Tammy Pocknett at 10:40 a.m., May 18, 2012, 
17127 Clemons Drive, Encino, CA 91436-4025, by FCC field agent Jeff Garretson.  
11
47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(D).  Section 503(b)(2)(D) provides for forfeitures of up to $10,000 for each in cases where 
the violation does not involve a Commission licensee or common carriers, among others.  See 47 U.S.C. 
§ 503(b)(2)(C).  In accordance with the inflation adjustment requirements contained in the Debt Collection 
Improvement Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-134, Sec. 31001, 110 Stat. 1321, the Commission increased the 
maximum statutory forfeiture under Section 503(b)(2)(C) to $16,000.  See 47 C.F.R. §1.80(b); see also Amendment 
of Section 1.80(b) of the Commission’s Rules, Adjustment of Forfeiture Maxima to Reflect Inflation, 23 FCC Rcd 
9845 (2008) (amendment of section 1.80(b) to reflect an increase in the maximum forfeiture for this type of 
violation to $16,000).
12
47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(E).  
Federal Communications Commission FCC 13-61
3
Act
13
and Section 64.1200(a)(4) of the Commission’s rules
14
by delivering 27 junk faxes to the telephone 
facsimile machines of 27 consumers.  In imposing the penalty, we emphasize that for the reasons 
articulated in the February 2012 NAL, the forfeiture penalty attaches to Teresa Goldberg a/k/a Tammy 
Pocknett as well “Software Training Company,” “Software Business Management,” “Software Managing 
Systems,” and any other name through which she does business.
15
  Because we have no evidence to 
suggest that the proposed forfeitures should be reduced or cancelled, we hereby impose a total forfeiture 
of $432,000 against Teresa Goldberg d/b/a Software Training Company for willfully and repeatedly
violating Section 227(b)(1)(C) of the Act and Section 64.1200(a)(4) of the Commission’s rules, as set 
forth in the February 2012 NAL.   
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
7. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Communications Act 
of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 503(b), and Section 1.80(f)(4) of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. 
§ 1.80(f)(4), that Teresa Goldberg a/k/a Tammy Pocknett d/b/a Software Training Company, Software 
Business Management and Software Managing Systems IS LIABLE FOR A MONETARY 
FORFEITURE to the United States Government in the sum of $432,000 for willfully and repeatedly 
violating Section 227(b)(1)(C) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(C), and Section 
64.1200(a)(4) of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(a)(4).
8. Payment of the forfeiture shall be made in the manner provided for in Section 1.80 of the 
Rules within thirty (30) calendar days after the release date of this Forfeiture Order.
16
If the forfeiture is 
not paid within the period specified, the case may be referred to the U.S. Department of Justice for 
enforcement of the forfeiture pursuant to Section 504(a) of the Act.
17
Teresa Goldberg d/b/a Software 
Training Company shall send electronic notification of payment to Johnny Drake at 
Johnny.Drake@fcc.gov, Rosemary Cabral at Rosemary.Cabral@fcc.gov, and Phillip Priesman at
Phillip.Priesman@fcc.gov on the date said payment is made.
9. The payment must be made by check or similar instrument, wire transfer, or credit card, 
and must include the NAL/Account number and FRN referenced above.  Regardless of the form of 
payment, a completed FCC Form 159 (Remittance Advice) must be submitted.
18
  When completing the 
FCC Form 159, enter the Account Number in block number 23A (call sign/other ID) and enter the letters 
“FORF” in block number 24A (payment type code). Below are additional instructions you should follow 
based on the form of payment you select:
                                                          
13
47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(C).
14
47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(a)(4).  
15
As explained in the February 2012 NAL, “Software Training Company” is a fictitious business name registered to 
“Teresa Goldberg” and using the address 17127 Clemons Drive, Encino, California.  Software Training Company, 
Fictitious Business Name Record, ID No. 20090624|7563, filed July 3, 2009, Westlaw RPCA-CA database,
available at http:// www.westlaw.com (last visited Dec. 10, 2012).  “Teresa Goldberg” is another name used by 
Tammy Pocknett, who owns the property located at the address used by Software Training Company.  Los Angeles, 
California Real Property Tax Assessor Record, Parcel Number: 2292-020-007, Westlaw Public Records - Real 
Property Records Combined database, available at http://www. westlaw.com (last visited Dec. 10, 2012).  Ms. 
Goldberg/Pocknett appears to use the names “Software Business Management” and “Software Training Systems” to 
carry out the business formerly conducted by “Software Training Company.”  
16
47 C.F.R. § 1.80.
17
47 U.S.C. § 504(a).
18
FCC Form 159 and detailed instructions for completing the form may be obtained at 
http://www.fcc.gov/Forms/Form159/159.pdf.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 13-61
4
? Payment by check or money order must be made payable to the order of the Federal 
Communications Commission. Such payments (along with the completed Form 159) must be 
mailed to Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box 979088, St. Louis, MO 63197-
9000, or sent via overnight mail to U.S. Bank – Government Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2-
GL, 1005 Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63101.
? Payment by wire transfer must be made to ABA Number 021030004, receiving bank 
TREAS/NYC, and Account Number 27000001. To complete the wire transfer and ensure 
appropriate crediting of the wired funds, a completed Form 159 must be faxed to U.S. Bank 
at (314) 418-4232 on the same business day the wire transfer is initiated.
? Payment by credit card must be made by providing the required credit card information on 
FCC Form 159 and signing and dating the Form 159 to authorize the credit card payment.   
The completed Form 159 must then be mailed to Federal Communications Commission, P.O. 
Box 979088, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000, or sent via overnight mail to U.S. Bank –
Government Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2-GL, 1005 Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO 
63101.
10. Any request for full payment under an installment plan should be sent to: Chief Financial 
Officer—Financial Operations, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1-
A625, Washington, D.C. 20554.
19
  If you have questions regarding payment procedures, please contact 
the Financial Operations Group Help Desk by phone, 1-877-480-3201, or by e-mail,
ARINQUIRIES@fcc.gov.
11. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be sent by First Class mail 
and Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to Teresa Goldberg a/k/a Tammy Pocknett d/b/a Software 
Training Company, Software Business Management and Software Managing Systems, 17127 Clemons 
Drive, Encino, CA 91436.   
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
                                                          
19
See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1914.