<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
			<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='https://www.burr.com/telephone-consumer-protection-act/rss.xsl' ?>
			<rss version='2.0' xmlns:content='http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/'
					xmlns:atom='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom'
					xmlns:dc='http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/'>
				<channel>
					<title>Telephone Consumer Protection Act Blog | Burr &amp; Forman LLP</title>
					<link>https://www.burr.com/telephone-consumer-protection-act/2015/</link>
					<atom:link href='https://www.burr.com/telephone-consumer-protection-act/2015/?rss' rel='self' type='application/rss+xml' />
					<description><![CDATA[The latest updates to Telephone Consumer Protection Act Blog.]]></description>
					<lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 Sep 2026 03:41:30 -0400</lastBuildDate>
					
				<item>
				<title>Nevada District Court Holds Defendant Not Vicariously Liable For Alleged
TCPA Violation</title>
				<link>https://www.burr.com/telephone-consumer-protection-act/nevada-district-court-holds-defendant-not-vicariously-liable-for-alleged-tcpa-violation</link>
<dc:creator>Joshua H. Threadcraft</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>nevada-district-court-holds-defendant-not-vicariously-liable-for-alleged-tcpa-violation</guid>

					<pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2015 09:00:01 -0500</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<u>Jones v. All American Auto Protection, Inc.</u>, 3:14-cv-00199-LRH-WGC (D. Nev. Nov. 24, 2015) Plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit against Defendant, a provider and administrator of vehicle service contracts, seeking to hold it vicariously liable for text messages allegedly sent by a direct marketing vendor in purported violation of the TCPA. In passing on this issue, the Court recognized that even if Defendant did not physically send the text messages, it could still be held vicariously liable under federal common law principles of agency including: (1) Formal Agency; (2&nbsp;... ]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>Senate and House Members Urge FCC To Limit ATDS Communications That Can Be
Made Pursuant To Budget Act of 2015</title>
				<link>https://www.burr.com/telephone-consumer-protection-act/senate-and-house-members-urge-fcc-to-limit-atds-communications-that-can-be-made-pursuant-to-budget-act-of-2015</link>
<dc:creator>Joshua H. Threadcraft</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>senate-and-house-members-urge-fcc-to-limit-atds-communications-that-can-be-made-pursuant-to-budget-act-of-2015</guid>

					<pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2015 09:00:02 -0500</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p>Thirty-eight members of the Senate and House of Representatives wrote Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler, asking the FCC to limit application of Section 301, to "accomplish several important consumer protection objectives:"</p> <ol> <li>Issue an immediate pronouncement stating that no calls can be made pursuant to Section 301, until the FCC finalizes regulations required by the provision</li> <li>Create Regulations governing calls made pursuant to Section 301 that:</li> </ol> <p style="padding-left: 30px;">Limit permissible calls to those collecting defaulted debt</p> <p style="padding-left: 30px;">Limit calls to reassigned numbers</p> <p style="padding-left: 30px;">Limit the number&nbsp;... </p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>Court Grants Summary Judgment For Calls Made To VoIP Line Connected To Cell
Phone Due To Lack of Knowledge</title>
				<link>https://www.burr.com/telephone-consumer-protection-act/court-grants-summary-judgment-for-calls-made-to-voip-line-connected-to-cell-phone-due-to-lack-of-knowledge</link>
<dc:creator>Joshua H. Threadcraft</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>court-grants-summary-judgment-for-calls-made-to-voip-line-connected-to-cell-phone-due-to-lack-of-knowledge</guid>

					<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2015 09:00:03 -0500</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<u>Nabil Ghawl v. Law Office of Howard Lee Schiff, P.C.</u>, No. 3:13-cv-115 (JBA) (D. Conn. Nov. 10, 2015) Plaintiff asserted various claims, including a TCPA claim, against a law firm and creditor on whose behalf the law firm allegedly attempted to collect debt. All Defendants moved for summary judgment on the TCPA claim, arguing that the number called was not a cell phone number. The number was assigned to a Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) line. VoIP &#147;is a technology that allows [users] to make voice calls using a broadband Internet connection instead of a regular (or analog) phone line&nbsp;... ]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>HANGUP Act Proposes To Repeal TCPA Exemption In Bipartisan Budget Agreement</title>
				<link>https://www.burr.com/telephone-consumer-protection-act/hangup-act-proposes-to-repeal-tcpa-exemption-in-bipartisan-budget-agreement</link>
<dc:creator>Joshua H. Threadcraft</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>hangup-act-proposes-to-repeal-tcpa-exemption-in-bipartisan-budget-agreement</guid>

					<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2015 09:00:04 -0500</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p>On November 4, 2015, after President Obama signed the Bipartisan Budget Agreement of 2015 into law, Senator Ed Markey introduced legislation to repeal Section 301 of the agreement that exempted from the TCPA's requirement of prior express consent calls made relating to debt owed to, or backed by the federal government.</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>Supreme Court Hears Argument On What Constitutes "Injury" For Standing
Purposes And Its Decision Could Have A Profound Effect On TCPA Litigation</title>
				<link>https://www.burr.com/telephone-consumer-protection-act/supreme-court-hears-argument-on-what-constitutes-injury-for-standing-purposes-and-its-decision-could-have-a-profound-effect-on-tcpa-litigation</link>
<dc:creator>Joshua H. Threadcraft</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>supreme-court-hears-argument-on-what-constitutes-injury-for-standing-purposes-and-its-decision-could-have-a-profound-effect-on-tcpa-litigation</guid>

					<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2015 09:00:05 -0500</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p>On November 2, 2015, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in <u>Spokeo v. Robins</u>, which raises the question of what constitutes requisite injury to support a claim for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. In <u>Spokeo</u>, Plaintiff filed a class action Complaint against Defendant, accusing Defendant of violating the FCRA by publishing false information about him. The trial court dismissed Plaintiff's claim, concluding Plaintiff had not experienced the requisite harm to sustain a claim. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed, holding that violation&nbsp;... </p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>Ninth Circuit Rejects Argument "Prior Express Consent" Extended Only To
Calls Regarding Problems With Online Transactions</title>
				<link>https://www.burr.com/telephone-consumer-protection-act/ninth-circuit-rejects-argument-prior-express-consent-extended-only-to-calls-regarding-problems-with-online-transactions</link>
<dc:creator>Joshua H. Threadcraft</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>ninth-circuit-rejects-argument-prior-express-consent-extended-only-to-calls-regarding-problems-with-online-transactions</guid>

					<pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2015 09:00:06 -0500</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p><u>Roberts v. Paypal, Inc.</u>, No. 13-16304 (9th Cir. Oct. 20, 2015) Pending before the Court was the trial court's Order granting summary judgment in Defendant's favor concluding that Plaintiff provided "prior express consent" to receive text messages from Defendant by knowingly providing his phone number. The Court of Appeals rejected Plaintiff's argument that his consent was limited, stating <em>"[u]nder the FCC's interpretation, Roberts expressly consented to text messages from PayPal when he provided PayPal his cell phone number. Even if Roberts believed that PayPal would only&nbsp;... </em></p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>Yahoo! Maybe Not. Third Circuit Remands Case Granting Summary Judgment To
Determine Whether ATDS Used in Light of FCC Declaratory Ruling</title>
				<link>https://www.burr.com/telephone-consumer-protection-act/yahoo-maybe-not-third-circuit-remands-case-granting-summary-judgment-to-determine-whether-atds-used-in-light-of-fcc-declaratory-ruling</link>
<dc:creator>Joshua H. Threadcraft</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>yahoo-maybe-not-third-circuit-remands-case-granting-summary-judgment-to-determine-whether-atds-used-in-light-of-fcc-declaratory-ruling</guid>

					<pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2015 09:00:07 -0500</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<u>Dominquez v. Yahoo, Inc.</u>, No. 14-1751 (3rd Cir. Oct. 23, 2015) Plaintiff bought a cell phone that came with a reassigned number. The previous owner of the number had subscribed to a Yahoo notification service, which sent text messages every time an email was sent to the previous owner's linked Yahoo account. Because the previous owner never canceled the service, Plaintiff received text messages every time the previous owner received an email totaling 27,809 text messages over a 17 month period. The trial court originally granted summary judgment in Yahoo's favor, concluding that the&nbsp;... ]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>U.S. Senate Passes Bill Paving Way For ATDS Calls To Cell Phones Collecting
Debt Owed Government</title>
				<link>https://www.burr.com/telephone-consumer-protection-act/u-s-senate-passes-bill-paving-way-for-atds-calls-to-cell-phones-collecting-debt-owed-government</link>
<dc:creator>Joshua H. Threadcraft</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>u-s-senate-passes-bill-paving-way-for-atds-calls-to-cell-phones-collecting-debt-owed-government</guid>

					<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2015 09:00:08 -0500</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[In the early hours of Friday morning, the U.S. Senate passed a budget bill 64-35, authorizing the use of automatic telephone dialing systems (ATDS) to collect debt owed to, or guaranteed by the U.S. Government without prior express consent. The bill is now before the President for consideration.]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>Third Circuit Holds Roommate Has Standing To Assert TCPA Claim</title>
				<link>https://www.burr.com/telephone-consumer-protection-act/third-circuit-holds-roommate-has-standing-to-assert-tcpa-claim</link>
<dc:creator>Joshua H. Threadcraft</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>third-circuit-holds-roommate-has-standing-to-assert-tcpa-claim</guid>

					<pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2015 09:00:09 -0400</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://wlflegalpulse.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/stein-13-cv-2136.pdf">Leyse v. Bank of America Nat. Ass'n</a>, No. 14-4073N (3rd Cir. Oct. 14, 2015) After receiving a prerecorded telemarketing call on the landline shared with his roommate, Plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit, which was met with a Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss. Of pertinence, is the U.S. Court of Appeals' holding that despite the undisputed fact Plaintiff's roommate was the subscriber and intended recipient of the call, Plaintiff had standing to prosecute a TCPA claim. Recognizing that consideration of who is the "called party" is relevant because prior consent of such an individual to&nbsp;... </p>]]></description>
</item>

			</channel></rss>