The same law firm, Boies Schiller, that filed a 2020 privacy class action vs. Google in U.S. District Court for Northern California in Oakland over its data collection practices, is filing batches of what Google is calling "copycat" complaints in Santa Clara County Superior Court in California on behalf of thousands of plaintiffs, seeking monetary relief.
Quierra Robey and her class members received unwanted spam telemarketing text messages from convenience store company Rebel Stores “without regard” to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act or for "individual privacy,” alleged Robey’s class action Monday (docket 5:24-cv-00787) in U.S. District Court for Central California in Riverside. The Hillsborough County, Florida, resident's lawsuit challenges all telemarketing text messages that were sent by Rebel Stores or on its behalf from around March 2020 through the date of preliminary approval of class certification, it said. The FTSA’s caller ID rules require that parties making telephonic sales calls transmit to the consumer’s caller ID service a phone number that’s capable of receiving phone calls in return, said the complaint. Unlike claims for damages for text message solicitations that the called party doesn’t consent to receive, claims for violations of the caller ID rules are “equally applicable” to all phone sales calls, text messages or voicemails, “regardless of whether they are solicited or consented to” or they are “traditional, automated, or recorded,” it said. Rebel Stores transmitted at least four numbers to Robey’s caller ID service, but her counsel was unable to connect with the company when dialing those numbers, said the complaint. The plaintiff never provided Rebel Stores with her prior express written consent or any other party acting on its behalf to authorize the subject telemarketing text messages, it said. In an attempt to opt out of any further telemarketing text communications with Rebel Stores, Robey on various occasions texted the company the word “stop,” but it ignored her requests and continued to text promotional telemarketing messages despite her clear revocation of any alleged prior consent, it said. The defendant’s failure to honor opt-out instructions is “indicative” of its failure to maintain written policies and procedures regarding its text messaging marketing, provide proper training to its telemarketing personnel and maintain an internal do not call list, it said. To the extent that Rebel Stores outsourced its telemarketing spam text messaging campaigns, it’s nonetheless liable for texts that violate the TCPA or FTSA, said the complaint. It’s liable for third-party actions “if it took steps to cause the telemarketing texts to be made,” or if the telemarketing texts were made under its “actual authority, apparent authority and/or ratification,” it said.
Video game companies make their games addictive to young people to maximize profits, alleged a class action (docket 1:24-cv-00064) against Epic Games, Take-Two Interactive Software, Rockstar Games, Microsoft, Mojang Studios, Sony Interactive, Roblox, Nintendo of America and Google, filed Friday in U.S. District Court for Northern Florida in Gainesville.
An April 1 FTC order denying MGM Resorts International's petition to quash a civil investigative demand (CID) “unlawfully deprives MGM of its rights under the Fifth Amendment,” said the hotel chain’s complaint Monday (docket 1:24-cv-01066) in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The CID requested information as part of a nonpublic investigation involving MGM's September cyberattack.
T-Mobile seeks the dismissal of the class action in which five plaintiffs challenge the lawfulness of T-Mobile’s terms of use and their prohibitions against expressing negative comments online about the company or its goods and services (see 2401260042), said its motion Friday (docket 2:24-cv-00700) in U.S. District Court for Central California in Los Angeles. T-Mobile concurrently filed a motion to compel the pro se plaintiffs’ claims to arbitration. T-Mobile filed both motions at the same time because, while the plaintiffs’ arbitration agreements should be enforced, the plaintiffs’ claims “are so fundamentally flawed that they cannot survive regardless of the venue,” said the motion. “For the sake of expedience and efficiency,” the defendant sets forth all the reasons that the plaintiffs “fail to state a single viable claim for relief against T-Mobile,” it said. Whether the court grants the motion to dismiss or the motion to compel, “the result would be the same -- an end to this lawsuit in its entirety,” it said. The complaint alleges that because of the current power of the internet and social media platforms to publicize a company’s offerings of goods or services, T-Mobile has “a significant incentive to minimize” the negative publicity it receives, including in the form of negative online reviews and comments. While conducting substantial business with California consumers, alleges the complaint, the terms that T-Mobile imposes on its customers “clearly violate” Section 1670.8 of the California Civil Code.
Courtney Hill voluntarily dismissed her Telephone Consumer Protection Act class action claims against InvestorPlace Media, said her notice Friday (docket 5:23-cv-00111) in U.S. District Court for Western North Carolina in Statesville. Hill’s claims are dismissed with prejudice and without prejudice as to any putative class claims, said the notice. Hill alleged that InvestorPlace, which sells subscribers stock market news and trading tips, doesn’t honor consumer requests to opt-out of text message solicitations, even after sending consumers confirmations that they’re unsubscribed from receiving future solicitations (see 2307130001).
Health insurance company Wellpoint Washington “routinely violates” the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by using an artificial or prerecorded voice to place nonemergency telemarketing calls to wrong or reassigned cellphone numbers, alleged Adelina Mendoza’s class action Friday (docket 2:24-cv-00497) in U.S. District Court for Western Washington in Seattle. The plaintiff for about six years has been “the sole and customary user” of her cellphone number, yet soon after obtaining that number, she began receiving Amerigroup Washington calls intended for someone named Serenity Sheridan, said the complaint. Amerigroup changed its name to Wellpoint in January, it said. Mendoza found the company’s artificial or prerecorded voice calls “to be irritating and invasive,” it said.
Robocalls are the top consumer complaint in the U.S., and the "conduct" of DirecTV and its debt collector, Credence Resource Management, “is a good reason why,” alleged plaintiff Joseph Brennan’s Telephone Consumer Protection Act class action Saturday (docket 2:24-cv-03019) in U.S. District Court for Central California in Los Angeles. A 2008 FCC order held that a company on whose behalf a phone call is made bears the responsibility for any TCPA violations, said the complaint. Credence collects debts for DirecTV and routinely violates the TCPA by using an artificial or prerecorded voice to place nonemergency calls to cellphone numbers without prior express consent, it said. The 2008 order establishes that DirecTV is “directly liable” for the calls that Credence made on its behalf, it said. DirecTV could have restricted Credence from using prerecorded messages to make the calls, but it didn’t, said the complaint. DirecTV knew that Credence was calling using prerecorded messages, it said. Brennan’s counsel even sent DirecTV a letter protesting its collection calling practices, but Credence continued calling the plaintiff using a prerecorded message even after receiving the letter, it said. Brennan estimates receiving at least five prerecorded calls from Credence, on DirecTV’s behalf, between Feb. 6 and March 1, said the complaint. Upon information and “good faith belief,” the plaintiff said the calls and prerecorded voice messages to his cellphone were intended for a person named Whitley, to collect a $509 DirecTV debt. Brennan doesn’t know anyone named Whitley, and he has never had, a DirecTV account, it said. The plaintiff incurred actual harm as a result of the calls, “in that he suffered an invasion of privacy, an intrusion into his life, and a private nuisance,” it said.
For “many years,” General Motors, OnStar and LexisNexis Risk Solutions have been collecting location, vehicle and personally identifiable information (PII) from OnStar-equipped vehicles and selling “vast amounts” of that data to third parties, alleged a privacy class action Friday (docket 2:24-cv-02978) in U.S. District Court for Central California in Los Angeles.
Plaintiffs Joseph Bond and Tonia Jewell-Vines and defendant Allstate have exchanged written discovery requests and responses in their Telephone Consumer Protection Act dispute, said their joint status report Thursday (docket 1:23-cv-04385) in U.S. District Court for Northern Illinois in Chicago. The parties have held “multiple, productive conferences” over their discovery responses, and those discussions are ongoing, with “no disputes ripe” for the court’s consideration, said the report. Plaintiffs Bond and Jewell-Vines allege in their second amended TCPA class action that Allstate hires insurance agents across the country to conduct telemarketing on its behalf, and authorizes those insurance agents to place telemarketing calls, including prerecorded calls and calls to numbers listed on the national do not call list (see 2311070030). But Allstate contends that those thousands of Allstate agents are independent contractors, and the company can’t respond on behalf of all of them. The parties are conferring to select dates in May for the depositions of Bond and Jewell-Vines, said the joint status report. Allstate has served document subpoenas on AT&T and Verizon for the plaintiffs’ call records, it said. Under an agreement among the parties involving the redaction of certain call records, responsive documents were produced directly to the plaintiffs’ counsel, who will produce the redacted records to Allstate upon completion of the redaction process, it said. The plaintiffs have served document subpoenas on Onvoy, Peerless Network, HyperCube Networks, Telcast Networks and BCM One Cloud Communications seeking records relating to phone numbers that were allegedly used to place calls to Jewell-Vines, said the report. The plaintiffs have also served document subpoenas on two Allstate agents, it said. Those agents have produced certain documents in response to the subpoenas, “and the conferral process is ongoing with respect to the additional documents requested,” it said. The parties believe that further discovery is needed for them to continue earlier discussions about the possibility of a negotiated settlement, said the report.