'Redundant' XCast Counterclaim Should Be Stricken, Says DOJ in Reply Brief
XCast’s counterclaim should be stricken or dismissed because it duplicates the defendant’s affirmative defenses, said DOJ in a Monday reply brief (docket 2:23-cv-03646) in support of its motion to strike or dismiss in U.S. District Court for Central California in…
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.
Los Angeles. The counterclaim also wouldn’t serve the purposes of the Declaratory Judgment Act, said the brief. XCast’s opposition brief “complains at length” that the FTC's complaint makes unfounded and “off base” allegations of fact, but those arguments will be resolved in deciding DOJ’s claim and don’t warrant a second counterclaim, the brief said. XCast’s opposition brief asserts the FTC is acting outside the scope of its authority and expertise, failed to do a sufficient investigation and to provide XCast with adequate pre-suit notice of its claims. Striking is “particularly warranted” because -- as DOJ has pointed out and XCast has not disputed -- "allowing the redundant counterclaim to proceed would prejudice Plaintiff by requiring it to draft duplicative pleadings, discovery, and motions,” said the brief. The DOJ’s May lawsuit alleges VoIP provider XCast transmitted “billions” of illegal robocalls since 2018 that sellers and telemarketers placed to American consumers in violation of the Telemarketing Sales Rule.