On August 6, 2015, in Chapman v. First Index, Inc., the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that an expired and unaccepted offer of a judgment under FRCP 68 that offers to fully compensate a purported class representative on his personal claim does not make the claim moot (Nos. 14–2773 & 14-2775, (7th Cir. Aug. 6, 2015)).

In 2009, Arnold Chapman sought to represent a class of persons who received faxes from First Index, Inc. without their consent in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) (47 U.S.C. §227). For his personal claim, Chapman sought statutory damages of $3,000 and injunctive relief. While Chapman's motion to represent the proposed class was pending, First Index made an offer of judgment under FRCP 68 to Chapman for $3,002, an injunction and costs, but not attorneys' fees. First Index recognized that Chapman could not accept the offer while the motion for certification was pending, which would be tantamount to abandoning the class he undertook to represent. However, because First Index did not want to leave the offer open indefinitely, the offer stated it would expire 14 days after a ruling on the motion for class certification. Chapman never replied to the offer, and, upon First Index's motion, the district court dismissed Chapman's personal claim as moot. Chapman appealed.

The Seventh Circuit vacated the district court's judgment dismissing Chapman's personal claim. The court acknowledged that when a plaintiff declines an offer that would satisfy his entire demand, many courts, including the Seventh Circuit itself in prior decisions, have concluded that the case is moot. However, the court referenced Justice Kagan's dissent in Genesis Healthcare Corp.v. Symczyk, which stated that an expired and unaccepted offer of a judgment does not render a case moot where relief remains possible (133 S. Ct. 1523, 1532-37 (2013)). The Seventh Circuit also noted that the majority did not disagree with Justice Kagan's analysis, but instead thought the issue had not been presented for decision, and that the Second and Ninth Circuits uniformly agreed with Justice Kagan in subsequent decisions ruling on the issue.

The Seventh Circuit then expressly overruled its own rulings in previous cases, and held that an expired and unaccepted offer of judgment for full compensation under FRCP 68 does not moot a case. In its opinion, the Seventh Circuit reasoned that: