Plaintiff's Calls Weren't 'Unwanted,' Says Case-Mate in Answer to Complaint
Plaintiff Warren Ingram fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, and any alleged text messages he received were made with his prior express consent, said defendant Case-Mate Tuesday in its answer (docket 3:23-cv-02813) to Ingram’s first…
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.
amended Telephone Consumer Protection Act complaint in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Jose. Text messages sent to Ingram “were not a nuisance or an invasion of privacy, and they did not represent intrusive advertising, marketing, or soliciting,” said the filing. Messages he received weren't unwanted and didn’t fall within the scope of communications Congress intended to remedy through the TCPA, Case-Mate said. Any claim against Case-Mate is barred because Ingram didn’t sustain damages, he’s not entitled to actual or statutory damages under the TCPA, the company didn’t commit knowing or willful conduct and Ingram gave prior consent or permission for Case-Mate to contact him, it said. Conduct allegedly giving rise to a violation “was not intentional” and thus couldn’t violate the TCPA, said the defense. The primary use of the phone involved in the dispute is for business purposes, so Ingram lacks standing to bring claims, it said. The TCPA and subsequent orders and rulings of the FCC interpreting the TCPA, “violate the First Amendment,” and the TCPA, including statutory damages available under the act, violates the due process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments, said the answer. Fines and penalties sought by Ingram violate the excessive fines clause of the Eighth Amendment and the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment, it said. To the extent Ingram pleaded an automatic telephone dialing system claim, those must be dismissed because his phone number “was not randomly or sequentially generated,” the answer said. Plaintiff's claims are “frivolous and lack good faith basis” in fact or law, said the defense.