The Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 ("TCPA"), Pub. L. No. 102-243, 105 Stat. 2394, prohibits use of an "automatic telephone dialing system" ("ATDS") to initiate voice calls and text messages to certain phone numbers, including numbers assigned to cellular telephone service, without the prior express consent of the called party. 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A).

Petitioner sued Respondent for violating this provision after Respondent used a predictive dialer to place timeshare telemarketing calls to Petitioner's cellular telephone. The district court entered judgment for the Respondent on the grounds the dialing system used to send the messages does not qualify as an ATDS, and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed.

The TCPA defines ATDS as "equipment which has the capacity — (A) to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and (B) to dial such numbers." 47 U.S.C. § 227(a)(1).

The first question presented is whether this definition encompasses predictive dialers, which automatically dial telephone numbers stored in a list and then forward those calls to a human being only if somebody answers the phone. Or, is the definition limited only to systems that utilize a random or sequential number generator to generate arbitrary numbers to be called? The Court recently granted a petition for a writ of certiorari to consider this question in Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, No. 19-511, 2020 U.S. Lexis 3559 (July 9, 2020).

The second question presented is whether a predictive dialer is removed from the scope of the ATDS definition simply because it requires a human being, who does not participate in the phone calls, to forward the list of numbers that will be called to the dialer.

Whether the TCPA's definition of an 'automatic telephone dialing system' encompasses predictive dialers that automatically dial telephone numbers stored in a list