[Effective until 1/8/2024] Delivery restrictions

CurrencyCurrent through May 31, 2023
Citation 47 C.F.R. §64.1200
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
21 cases
  • Aguilar v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Central District of Illinois
    • 10 Marzo 2017
    ...or prerecorded voice . . . to any telephone number . . . for which the party is charged for the call." 47 USC § 227(b)(1)(A)(i)-(iii); 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200. A caller using an automatic telephone dialing system ("ATDS") must have prior express consent by the person being called. § 227(b)(1)(A......
  • Morris v. Lincare, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • 24 Mayo 2024
    ...Lincare used prerecorded messages to make non-emergency calls to Plaintiff's cellular telephone in violation of 47 U.S.C. § 227 and 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200. Id. ¶¶ 40-43. Count II, Plaintiff sues Lincare for violation of the FTSA, Florida's statutory counterpart to the TCPA. Id. ¶¶ 48-55. She a......
  • Callier v. Tip Top Capital Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Texas
    • 22 Marzo 2024
    ...this subsection may” bring an action “in an appropriate court.” The “regulations prescribed under this subsection” are codified at 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200. 47 C.F.R. 64.1200(c)(2) makes it an offense to “initiate any telephone solicitation to . . . [a] residential telephone subscriber who has r......
  • Barton v. Walmart Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington
    • 9 Abril 2024
    ...(1990). C. FEDERAL LAW CLAIM: TCPA CLAIM The Plaintiff asserts a TCPA claim under 47 U.S.C. § 227(c) and its implementing regulation, 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200. Dkt. 12. Walmart argues that the Plaintiff's TCPA should be dismissed because the text messages at issue were not “telephone solicitatio......
  • Get Started for Free
19 firm's commentaries
  • Statutory Class Actions: Developments and Strategies
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • 3 Marzo 2015
    ...Rcd. 1830, 1831 (2012). The TCPA places restrictions on certain telemarketing calls, text messages, and faxes. See 47 U.S.C.A. § 227; 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200. The TCPA also provides consumers with a private right of action under which a consumer may recover between $500 and $1,500 for every vio......
  • U.S. Supreme Court Hears Argument over Frequently Litigated Provision of the TCPA
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • 11 Diciembre 2020
    ...[2] 47 U.S.C. § 227. [3] Id. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii). Whether written or oral consent is required depends upon the content of the calls. 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(a)(1), (2). [4] See, e.g., Salcedo v. Hanna, 936 F.3d 1162, 1166 (11th Cir. 2019). [5] 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1), (b)(3). [6] We described thi......
  • Advertised Businesses Not Liable for Unauthorized Fax Advertisements, FCC Declares
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • 2 Octubre 2020
    ...facsimile unsolicited advertisement is sent or whose goods or services are advertised or promoted in the unsolicited advertisement.” 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(f)(10) (2019).[1] The Commission also has observed that the “sender” of a fax is usually, but not always, the business advertised in the f......
  • FCC Clarifies That Government Contractors Must Obtain Prior Express Consent Under the TCPA
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • 16 Diciembre 2020
    ...contractors may avail themselves of one of the TCPA’s statutory exemptions to the consent requirement. 1 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A); 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(a). 2 Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, Broadnet Teleservices LLC Petition for Declaratory R......
  • Get Started for Free