Search for: "Gadelhak v. AT&T Services, Inc" Results 1 - 8 of 8
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
AT&T Services, Inc. that a defendant’s dialing system did not constitute an “automatic telephone dialing system” (ATDS) under the meaning of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act where it was not capable of generating random and sequential numbers. [read post]
2 Mar 2020, 8:00 am by Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP
AT&T Services, Inc. that a defendant’s dialing system did not constitute an ATDS under the TCPA where it was not capable of generating random and sequential numbers. [read post]