WASHINGTON—The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a recent decision has expanded the definition of an "autodialer," keeping it in line with the definition adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in a series of rulings from 2003 to 2015, which was invalidated in March.
In the lawsuit, Marks v. Crunch San Diego LLC, the appeals court rejected the defendant's argument that in order to qualify as an autodialer, the equipment must operate without any human intervention.
In its analysis of the decision, NAFCU noted the Ninth Circuit's decision contradicts two other federal appellate court decisions this year that have shown a willingness to more narrowly define an Automatic Telephone Dialing System (ATDS), NAFCU explained. In March, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit invalidated the FCC's definition of "autodialer" and rejected the commission's interpretation of when a caller violates the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by calling a reassigned number.
The FCC is currently considering stakeholder feedback on its request for comments on various TCPA issues, including the definition of "autodialer." NAFCU reminded it has called for the FCC to take a narrower approach to defining an ATDS that only includes equipment currently capable of dialing numbers without human intervention—which would allow credit unions to contact their members without fear of breaking the law. The association also supports creating a centralized reassigned numbers database managed by the FCC.