Few things under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) are subject to as much uncertainty as the definition of “automatic telephone dialing system” (ATDS). This year’s decision in ACA Int’l v. FCC, 885 F.3d 687 (D.C. Cir. 2018) seems to have raised more questions than it answered as courts and the FCC continue to
In Tucker v. Credit One Bank, the plaintiff filed suit after receiving hundreds of debt collection calls allegedly via an ATDS after informing Credit One they had reached the wrong number. In investigating the claims, Credit One determined that the calls were intended for plaintiff’s daughter, who provided the plaintiff’s number as a secondary
In a recent opinion, the Ninth Circuit held a plaintiff lacked Article III standing under Spokeo for her complaint on behalf of herself and a putative class action alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) against the National Park Service (the “NPS”). In Daniel v. National Park Service, No. 16-35689 (9th Cir.
In Dominguez v. Yahoo!, Inc., the Third Circuit issued a precedential decision, requiring calling platforms have present—not potential—capacity to store or produce and call telephone numbers using a random or sequential number generator to constitute an “autodialer” under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). After buying a used smartphone, Dominguez received texts from Yahoo
