A recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Duran v. La Boom Disco, Inc. has interrupted the emerging consensus around the definition of “autodialer” in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). On April 7, 2020, a Second Circuit panel joined a Ninth Circuit panel in adopting a broad reading of the statutory definition of “automatic telephone dialing system” (ATDS), commonly referred to as an autodialer.
The U.S. Courts of Appeal increasingly agree on how to interpret the definition of “automatic telephone dialing system” (“ATDS” or “autodialer”) in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”). The Seventh Circuit held that an “autodialer” must use “a random or sequential number generator” to either store or produce numbers.
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued its long-awaited decision in ACA International, et al, v. FCC, a case involving multiple petitions for review of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC’s) omnibus 2015 ruling interpreting provisions of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (the TCPA or Act).