Category: TCPA

On August 11, 2016 the FCC issued its long-awaited ruling implementing the 2016 Bi-Partison Balanced Budget Act (“BBA”) Amendment that carved out collection calls on government-backed debt from TCPA coverage. In re Rules & Regulations Implementing Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (August 11, 2016) FCC 16–99 (“2016 FCC BBA Order”)

In the latest dismissal of a TCPA case for lack of Article III standing, a District Court in California held that a plaintiff does not suffer an injury in fact from calls she did not hear, calls she heard but did not answer, and calls she answered but did not result in an injury traceable to the use of an ATDS.

I was contemplating a monthly column given the confusion surrounding the FCC’s recent rulings. I guess I better make it weekly.

While you were off barbecuing and lighting fireworks this weekend the FCC’s staff was feverishly working to give Uncle Sam a birthday present—free reign to robocall your cell phone! That’s right, effective immediately the TCPA no longer applies to the federal government or any of its agencies or contractors.

Dorsey’s TCPA litigation team continues to thrive on the cutting edge. In a first of its kind ruling, a Pennsylvania District Court ruled today that plaintiffs who manufacture Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) lawsuits are no longer welcome in Federal Court.

On June 14, 2016, Dorsey’s Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) litigation team secured a stay in an individual TCPA case in the Northern District of Georgia pending the D.C. Circuit’s decision in ACA Int’l, et al. v. Fed. Commc’n Comm’n, No. 15-1211 (D.C. Cir. July 13, 2015).

A District Court in Arkansas just drew a line in the sand. An automatic telephone dialing system (“ATDS”), it held, is more than hearing “a beep and a pause.” And, yes, human intervention really does matter.

Commentary on the Notice of Proposed Rule Making, Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, CG Docket No. 02-278, issued May 6, 2016.

Does the roommate of a telephone subscriber have standing to sue for an alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act? Surprisingly, according to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, the answer is “yes.”