Comcast Denies TCPA Allegations in Minn., Calls Statute Unconstitutional
The “statutory damages” provisions of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act “violate the safeguards guaranteed” by the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and 14th amendments “because they constitute excessive fines and are grossly disproportionate to any actual harm that may be suffered” by TCPA plaintiffs, said Comcast's answer Wednesday (docket 0:22-cv-02377) to the Sept. 28 TCPA complaint of consumer Chester Graham in U.S. District Court for Minnesota.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Graham’s complaint alleged that Comcast made “willful and knowing” robocalls to his cellphone using an automatic telephone dialing system and “an artificial or prerecorded voice” (see 2210070030). The willful and knowing nature of Comcast’s calls made Graham, a Northfield, Minnesota, resident, eligible for treble damages under the TCPA, said his complaint.
The TCPA and its implementing regulations “are unconstitutionally vague and thus violate the due process provisions” of the Fifth and 14th amendments, said Comcast.The FCC “has primary jurisdiction over the TCPA issues in this case, including, but not limited to, determining what is an ‘artificial or prerecorded voice’” under the statute, it said. Graham “is precluded from recovering treble damages for a willful and knowing violation of the TCPA because any such violations, which Comcast denies, “were not willful or knowing,” it said.
Comcast denies it violated “any referenced statutory or regulatory provision” of the TCPA or that Graham “is entitled to any relief whatsoever,” said the company. Comcast admits “it has engaged in telemarketing, among other forms of business, in Minnesota,” but denies it placed the unwanted solicitation calls to Graham or that it owned the phone number, 800-266-2278, from which the calls were placed, it said.
Graham “fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against Comcast,” said the company. Because Graham “has suffered no injury, he does not have standing to assert a TCPA claim,” it said. Any recovery of damages “as a result of this lawsuit would result in unjust enrichment,” it said.