Camunas v. Nat'l Republican Senatorial Comm.

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

In the instant action, Plaintiff Rolando Camunas alleges the National Republican Senatorial Committee ("NRSC") violated subsections 227(b) and 227(c) of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA") by sending him unsolicited text messages. Presently before the Court is the NRSC's motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1), and failure to state a claim, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).

Because Camunas adequately pleads that he has standing to bring the instant action, the Court will deny the motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. However, because the Amended Complaint does not plausibly allege that the NRSC, rather than another person or entity, sent the text messages at issue or that the NRSC used an automatic telephone dialing system to do so, the Court will grant the motion to dismiss the Amended [*2]  Complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). Because it is not clear that amendment would be futile, the Court will afford Camunas an opportunity to file a second amended complaint.

II. BACKGROUND¹

Camunas is a Philadelphia resident whose cell phone number has been on the federal Do Not Call Registry since June 2015. The NRSC is a political organization that raises money for Republican senatorial candidates. Although Camunas never consented for the NRSC to call or text him, he received at least six text messages from the NRSC in 2020, which he describes as "generic and obviously pre-written." Am. Compl. ¶ 21, ECF No. 14. The NRSC's website states that its opt-in messaging program communicates using "recurring autodialed marketing messages." Am. Compl. ¶ 22.

Camunas alleges the NRSC violated subsections 227(b) and 227(c) of the TCPA, which "proscribes abusive telemarketing practices." Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, 141 S. Ct. 1163, 1167, 209 L. Ed. 2d 272 (2021). "Congress passed the TCPA to address 'the proliferation of intrusive, nuisance calls' to consumers and businesses from telemarketers." Id. (quoting note following 47 U.S.C. § 227). Subsection 227(b) of the Act prohibits making certain calls "using any automatic telephone dialing system" without "the prior express consent of the called party." See 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A). Subsection 227(c) creates a private right of action for [*3]  "[a] person who has received more than one telephone call within any 12-month period by or on behalf of the same entity in violation of the regulations prescribed" under the subsection, which govern the Do Not Call Registry. See id. § 227(c)(5).

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.