Some of you may remember that back in early November 2015, I wrote about a then little-noticed provision slipped into the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015. That provision, designed to find more revenues to offset government spending (and thus help to reduce the federal deficit), created an exemption from the Telephone Consumer Protection Act

Automated dialing systems are back – temporarily – like never before. The new Budget Act provision makes “robocalls” to mobile phones a nonissue when used to collect money owed to the United States government. Following this release, Sen. Ed Markey spoke out and is reportedly preparing a “Hang Up Act” aimed at repealing this robocall

The Declaratory Ruling and Order issued by the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) July 10, 2015,  clarified several sections of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), including addressing a petition filed by the American Association of Healthcare Administrative Management regarding “free, pro-consumer… healthcare-related messages,” and under what circumstances such messages are exempt from the TCPA’s

Perturbed by two allegedly unwanted faxes, Arnold Chapman brought a putative class action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”). For himself, he sought the most the statute could provide – $3,000, an injunction, and costs. ($3,000 represents $500 in statutory damages for each of the two faxes, trebled for an allegedly knowing or wilful violation.) The defendant offered Chapman $3,002, and the entry of an injunction, and costs. Chapman let the offer expire without accepting it. The District Court dismissed the case as moot.

Chapman appealed, and late last week, the Seventh Circuit reversed the lower court ruling. In Arnold Chapman v. First Index, Inc., the Seventh Circuit held that an expired offer of judgment does not moot an individual plaintiff’s claims. In so ruling, the panel reversed circuit precedent and aligned itself with the Second, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits on the issue.Continue Reading What Do You Get for the Plaintiff Who Has Everything? Maybe a Class Action, Ruled The Seventh Circuit

On Friday, July 24, the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation issued an Order consolidating in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals three timely petitions for review of a July 10, 2015 Declaratory Ruling and Order of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). That Order resolved 21 petitions for declaratory ruling, proposed rulemaking and clarification

In its July 10, 2015 TCPA Omnibus Declaratory Ruling and Order, the Federal Communications Commission unfairly lumps legitimate businesses in with the telemarketing abusers that the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) was intended to deter. Highlights within the ruling include:

  • An Expansive Definition of “Automatic Telephone Dialing System” or “Autodialer”
  • Liability for Calling Reassigned/Wrong

Yesterday, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) once again demonstrated to businesses the wisdom of that old adage, “be careful what you ask for.” The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) protects consumers from unwanted telephone calls and text messages and has created a cottage industry for the plaintiffs’ bar bringing a tsunami of individual and class

On November 24, the FCC released a wide-ranging public notice seeking comment on a September 9, 2014, letter from the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG), purportedly written “on behalf of the millions of Americans regularly receiving unwanted and harassing telemarketing calls.” The letter, signed by a bipartisan group of 39 AGs led by Chris

On October 30, 2014, the FCC issued a much-anticipated ruling (“FCC Order”) resolving several petitions seeking clarification of the opt-out notice requirement regarding advertisements faxed to consumers, contained in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, section 227 of the Communications Act (“TCPA”). The FCC ruled that all such faxes, even those sent with the recipient’s prior