Crunch has asked the Ninth Circuit to stay its mandate so that Crunch can file a petition for certiorari to the US Supreme Court.
11/6/2018 15:00
In a closely watched case impacting the accounts receivable management industry, Marks v. Crunch San Diego, LLC, litigant Crunch has asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to stay its recent ruling on the definition of an ATDS so Crunch can file a petition certiorari (a formal request for the Supreme Court to hear and review a case) to the U.S. Supreme Court.
As previously reported by ACA International, a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel recently ruled that “the statutory definition of an ATDS includes a device that stores telephone numbers to be called, whether or not those numbers have been generated by a random or sequential number generator.” Following the ruling, Crunch filed a Petition for Rehearing En Banc to the entire Ninth Circuit, which was subsequently denied. In light of the ongoing confusion over the meaning of automatic telephone dialing systems, which has for years created uncertainty and compliance burdens on ACA International’s members, ACA submitted an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief with the Ninth Circuit arguing that “[t]he statute’s text and context confirm that ‘using a random or sequential number generator’ is an integral, not an optional or alternative, part of the definition” of an ATDS.
ACA International’s efforts to proactively support the accounts receivable management industry are part of the association’s Industry Advancement Fund, and are made possible by funding through ACA’s Industry Advancement Fund. ACA will continue to follow the Marks case and will keep its members posted on any new developments.