Plaintiff Can't Allege Calls to Residential Number, Says Vanguard Brief
Plaintiff Zachary Fridline failed to allege registry on the national do not call list, failed to allege calls to a residential number and failed to allege “an unrequited request for internal policies,” said defendant Vanguard Vehicle Armor in a Tuesday…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
filing (docket 4:23-cv-01194) in support of a partial motion to dismiss a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) complaint in U.S. District Court for Middle Pennsylvania in Williamsport. Fridline asserted two TCPA claims: (1) that defendants Vanguard and Integrity Vehicle Group used a prerecorded voice to contact him without his consent, and (2) that defendants contacted him even though his number was registered on the do not call registry, said a brief in support of the motion to dismiss. Fridline fails to allege he registered his telephone number on the do not call list so he can't seek redress for calls placed to him at that number, said the brief, noting the plaintiff doesn’t have a traditional landline phone. Because Fridline’s claims are limited to calls to a residential phone, and he fails to plead that his cellular phone was used for residential purposes, his claim under Section 227 of Title 47 must be dismissed, it said. The plaintiff’s claim under Section 64.1200(d) concerning Vanguard’s internal compliance procedures is also limited to calls placed to a residential line, the brief said. Because Fridline fails to plead that his landline is residential in nature and doesn’t allege he ever requested Vanguard’s internal policies -- and that such a request was denied -- he's unable to state a claim, it said.