In a major victory for plaintiffs pursuing claims related to robocalls and texts, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit panel has adopted an expansive view of the legal definition of an autodialer, rejecting what it called the Third Circuit’s “unreasoned assumption” that devices must be able to generate random or sequential numbers in order to qualify.
Under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, calls made via an “automatic telephone dialing system,” or ATDS, without the receiver’s consent can carry statutory penalties between $500 and $1,500 per violation.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]