Breaking Down the Latest Decision in the Purdue Pharma Case
Hooper, Kearney and Macklin on Cutting Edge Topics in the False Claims Act
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Trademark Infringement - Tiffany & Co. Versus Costco
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: A Discussion of Kisor v. Wilkie
On January 24, 2025, three days before the Federal Communications Commission's new Telephone Consumer Protection Act "one-to-one" consent standard was due to take effect, the FCC issued an order postponing the standard's...more
Just one business day before new robotext and robocall rules requiring one-to-one consent and “logically and topically” related requirements were set to take effect, a federal appeals court vacated the requirements and...more
In an eleventh-hour play, on January 24, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit issued a decision that vacated the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) One-to-One Consent Rule, which was all set to go into effect on January 27, 2025....more
We were all set to release our blog announcing the long-awaited Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) One-to-One Consent Rule (Rule), which was issued in December 2023 and set to take effect on Jan. 27. But alas, both the...more
Late in the afternoon on January 24, 2025, the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) “One-to-One Consent Rule,” which was scheduled to take effect on January 27, 2025, was struck down and vacated by the US Court of...more
In the latest decision in a long-running saga in Drazen v. Pinto, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals tackled several issues regarding a proposed class settlement agreement....more
In the case of Drazen v. Pinto, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals sitting en banc ruled unanimously that plaintiffs who received a single unwanted telemarketing text message suffered a concrete injury. In 2019, Susan...more
Plaintiffs’ attempts to keep FTSA cases venued in Florida state courts are being upended by the Eleventh Circuit’s recent decision to revisit en banc its Article III standing precedent in single-text message cases....more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently solidified an important rule about class standing: the definition of a class in a settlement agreement must be limited to class members with Article III standing....more
The Eleventh Circuit recently decertified a TCPA settlement class because the class definition included members who could never have Article III standing under Eleventh Circuit precedent. Drazen v. Pinto, — F.4th –, No....more
On August 10, 2021, a divided Ninth Circuit panel vacated a trial court’s certification of two nationwide classes, finding that the defendant had not waived its personal jurisdiction objection to class certification by not...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued the following decisions: Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, No. 19-715; Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG, No. 19-760: In April 2019, three United States House of Representatives’ committees...more
On November 15, the Eleventh Circuit vacated an order certifying a class of individuals who claimed to have received robocalls in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), holding that the district court...more
The Eleventh Circuit last week issued a common-sense ruling vacating class certification in a TCPA case—an area of the law where common sense does not always prevail. In Cordoba v. DIRECTV, LLC, No. 19-12077 (11th Cir. Nov....more
At the end of the Supreme Court’s most recent term, the Court released its long-awaited ruling in PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., 139 S. Ct. 2051 (June 20, 2019)—a case that could have carried...more
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) prohibits unsolicited calls, text messages and faxes; it’s a federal statute that provides for statutory damages between $500-$1,500 per violation. With the speed and ease (and...more
Real Property Update - Mortgagee Liability: because section 701.04(1)(a), Florida Statutes, requires that the holder of a mortgage deliver to the mortgagor a written estoppel letter setting forth the unpaid balance of the...more
In its long-awaited ruling addressing whether the Administrative Orders Review Act (Hobbs Act) requires district courts to accept the FCC's legal interpretations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (the TCPA), the...more
TCPA litigators have been closely monitoring the U.S. Supreme Court's docket waiting for a ruling in the PDR Network case. At stake is what kind of judicial deference should be given to the FCC's interpretation of the...more
In November 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court had granted certiorari in PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., to decide whether the Hobbs Act required the district court to accept the Federal Communications...more
Are district courts prohibited in every instance from considering challenges to the Federal Communication Commission (“FCC”)’s interpretation of certain provisions in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act – or can district...more
In a recent decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a federal district court was not necessarily bound by the Federal Communications Commission’s prior interpretation of a federal statute over which the agency has...more
Dodging the question of whether the Hobbs Act requires a federal court to accept the 2006 Federal Communication Commission (FCC) Order that provides the legal interpretation for the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA),...more
On June 20, 2019, the Supreme Court released its long-awaited decision in PDR v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic. The Court was expected to provide greater clarity about the extent to which litigants can challenge the Federal...more
On June 20, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., No. 17-1705, holding that whether the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) 2006 order interpreting the...more