Following Van Patten v. Vertical Fitness Group, LLC (9th Cir. 2017) 847 F.3d 1037, 1044-1045, this decision affirms summary judgment for defendant in this TCPA suit based on a finding that plaintiff gave his express consent to defendant’s text messaging his cellphone. A person who knowingly releases his cellphone number consents to be called at that number so long as the responsive messages relate to the same subject or type of transaction as the messages that led to the response. However, the decision holds, over a partial dissent, that a district court may not award a prevailing defendant attorney fees as “costs” under FRCivP 41(d), at least when the underlying statute under which the action is brought does not provide for a fee award and the prevailing defendant does not prove that plaintiff filed the action in bad faith, vexatiously, with wanton actions, or with forum shopping.