Search for: "Marks v. Crunch San Diego, LLC" Results 1 - 19 of 19
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Oct 2018, 12:40 pm by Leila Wozniak
Crunch San Diego LLC, the panel held that, in light of ACA Int’l, the U.S. [read post]
3 Dec 2018, 10:45 am by Leila Wozniak
Crunch San Diego, LLC, 904 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 2018) (previously discussed here). [read post]
28 Jan 2020, 1:00 pm by Rafael Reyneri
Crunch San Diego, LLC, 904 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 2018), which embraced a more expansive view of the ATDS definition. [read post]
9 Dec 2020, 5:58 pm by Aubrey Mandus
Crunch San Diego, LLC, 904 F.3d 1041, 1052-53 (9th Cir. 2018). [read post]
9 Dec 2020, 5:58 pm by Aubrey Mandus
Crunch San Diego, LLC, 904 F.3d 1041, 1052-53 (9th Cir. 2018). [read post]
16 May 2019, 1:41 pm by Daniel S. Blynn
Crunch San Diego, LLC, 904 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 2018)] as a device that stores numbers to be called, irrespective of whether they have been generated by a random or sequential number generator. [read post]
7 Dec 2020, 1:57 pm by Amanda Shanor
Crunch San Diego, LLC, the 9th Circuit concluded that, in the statutory definition of an ATDS, the adverbial phrase “using a random or sequential number generator” only modifies to “produce,” not “to store. [read post]
15 Dec 2020, 1:40 pm by Adam C. Ragan
Crunch San Diego LLC, 904 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 2018), ruled consistent with the third interpretation that a system capable of sending text messages to a list of stored telephone numbers was an ATDS. [read post]