Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

CEB Prac. Guide § 2B.23: ATDS

Subscribe to Consumer Finance

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Consumer Finance Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

In Gadelhak v. AT&T, here, the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit disagreed with the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Marks, finding that an ATDS requires that a system store or produce numbers using a random or sequential number generator. We’ll save the intense grammatical parsing for the body of the opinion—here, we’ll just give the punchline. We hold that “using a random… Read More

In Ewing v. Pollard, No. 19-CV-855-CAB-BGS, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22659 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 10, 2020), Judge Bencivengo dismissed a TCPA case due to calls being manually dialed. This section of the TCPA prohibits "any call (other than a call made for emergency purposes or made with the prior express consent of the called party) using any automatic telephone dialing… Read More

In Beal v. Outfield Brew House, No. 2:18-cv-4028-MDH, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22487 (W.D. Mo. Feb. 10, 2020), Judge Harpol granted summary judgment to a TCPA defendant, rejecting the 9th Cir.’s decision in Marks.   Plaintiff urges the Court to follow the Ninth Circuit's opinion, which found the statutory definition of an ATDS ambiguous and interpreted an ATDS to include devices… Read More

In Hoagland v. Axos Bank, No. 19-cv-00750-BAS-JLB, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20543, at *9 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 6, 2020), Judge Bashant declined to stay a TCPA case while the FCC considers what an ATDS is. Defendant argues the case should be stayed while the FCC considers promulgating regulations further defining an ATDS and determining the proper approach to calls made… Read More

In Ammons v. Diversified Adjustment Serv., No. 2:18-cv-06489-ODW (MAAx), 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175842, at *12-14 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 9, 2019) , Judge Wright held that LiveVox' manual dial requirement disqualified it from being an ATDS, and nothing in Marks changes that conclusion. The parties agree that all calls DAS placed to Ammons's 3436 Cell Phone used LiveVox HCI. (DSUF… Read More

In DeNova v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, No. 8:17-cv-2204-T-23AAS, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163014 (M.D. Fla. Sep. 24, 2019), Judge Merryday overruled the Magistrate’s ruling that an Aspect dialing system was an ATDS. Denise DeNova alleges (Doc. 2) that between April 2013 and May 2016, Ocwen Loan Servicing, attempting to collect DeNova's delinquent mortgage, used an "Aspect predictive dialing system"… Read More

In Smith v. Premier Dermatology, No. 17 C 3712, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152887 (N.D. Ill. Sep. 9, 2019), Judge Alonso found that no ATDS was used to send text messages and granted summary judgment against a TCPA Plaintiff. While this Court might quibble with the grammatical analysis of Pinkus in some particulars, it agrees with its central insight that… Read More

In Brown v. Ocwen Loan Servicing Llc, No. 8:18-cv-136-T-60AEP, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151236, at *11-15 (M.D. Fla. Sep. 5, 2019), Judge Barber granted in part and denied in part summary judgment brought by a TCPA defendant, distinguishing between pre-recorded and non-prerecorded calls. Ocwen contends summary judgment on the Browns' TCPA claims is warranted because its Aspect dialer is not… Read More

1 2 3 18