The trial court correctly granted defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion to strike plaintiff’s Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act suit because plaintiff could not show a likelihood of prevailing on the claim.  Civ. Code 1788.17 incorporates provisions of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, including 15 USC 1692e which forbids false statements in attempts to collect debts and misrepresentation of the character or legal status of the debt.  Federal decisions hold that a misstatement does not violate 1692e unless the statement is “material.”  (Afewerki v. Anaya Law Group (9th Cir. 2017) 868 F.3d 771, 773.)  Here, the alleged misstatement was in naming (in the collection action complaint) the creditor that held the debt at the time of charge-off as required by Civ. Code 1788.58(a)(6), part of California’s Fair Debt Buying Practices Act.  This decision concludes that the misnaming of the creditor at charge-off was not material and would not mislead the least sophisticated debtor because the complaint correctly named the originating creditor so the debtor could easily determine whether he owed the debt sued upon.  The debtor would not have known of the creditor at charge-off since the assignment to that creditor occurred after default and a halt in communications with the creditor.