HeyJaredTroutman Amin
- Indexed articles, last 90 days
- 9
- Latest publication
- Oct 1, 2026
- Outlet visibility, for natlawreview.com
- Top 1M sites
- Earliest in this view
- Jul 21, 2026
Latest articles
NO LANDLINE, NO CLAIM: Eastern District Of Missouri Finds That Cellphones Aren’t Residential For DNC Purposes (opens the original)
Read excerpt
It seems that the good news keeps rolling! In EDWARD J. KOELLER V. OX APPSEC SECURITY, INC., 2026 WL 2935851 (E.D. Mo. Sept. 30, 2026), the court granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss, concluding that Plaintiffs failed to state a claim because TCPA’s DNC provisions do not extend to cellphones. And this comes just after Florida’s decision, where the Southern District of Florida also determined cell phones aren’t residential lines. Michael Anthony v. Brian Marketing Group, 2026 WL 2685650 (S.D. Fl
100ish% AVOCADO OIL: Complaint Alleges that Chosen Foods, LLC Deceptively Labels its Products as Made With 100% Avocado Oil. (opens the original)
Read excerpt
Hi CIPA World! I’m popping in to share a complaint that was just filed by Plaintiff Nancy Zeldin against Defendant Chosen Foods, LLC (“Chosen Foods”) on September 28, 2026 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. Zeldin v. Chosen Foods LLC, 3:26CV05565. This is a class action brought on behalf of consumers who purchased products labeled and advertised as “made with 100% pure avocado oil” from Chosen Foods. The complaint alleges that Chosen Foods has been selli
COLORADO DOUBLES DOWN: D. Colorado Holds, Once Again, That Text Messages Are Not “Telephone Calls” Under The TCPA DNC Provision (opens the original)
Read excerpt
Just five days after the Radvansky decision holding that text messages are not “telephone calls” under the TCPA’s DNC rules, another judge in the same district has reached the exact same conclusion. In Brown v. Hursh Group, LLC, 2026 WL 2906613 (D. Colo. Sept. 28, 2026), the court found that text messages are not “telephone calls” under § 227(c)(5) and dismissed the class action complaint WITH PREJUDICE! We love to see courts reading the statute for what it actually says, right? So, let’s get in
ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST: California Court Dismisses CIPA § 631 and § 632 Action Because the Plaintiffs Failed To Establish Article III Standing (opens the original)
Read excerpt
We just saw a massive win for the defense that we must talk about. In Demetrius Smith, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Rack Room Shoes, Inc., the Northern District of California dismissed Federal Wiretap Act claim and CIPA Section 631 and Section 632 claims for lack of Article III standing.Demetrius Smith, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Rack Room Shoes, Inc., No. 24-CV-06709-RFL, 2026 WL 2825524 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 21, 2026) Let’s get into the details, as this ruling shows what a court expects from a plaintiff asse
THE PHIA COOKIE STUFFING CONTROVERSY: What Businesses Should Know (opens the original)
Read excerpt
Hi CIPA World! Before joining Troutman Amin, I kept up with a controversy involving Phia Holdings, Inc. (“Phia”), the company founded by Phoebe Gates (yes, that Gates) and Sophia Kianni. The popular shopping app and browser extension, Phia, helps shoppers find the best deals and alternative options across thousands of online retailers. But this summer, Phia drew attention for a different reason after Bloomberg reported that its browser extension was engaging in cookie stuffing. In affiliate mark
Publishing over time
Last 90 days. Choose a month to open its work.
Recurring subjects
Named in the text we hold. One piece can cover several.
Audience
Top 1M sites
For natlawreview.com, the outlet · Measured Aug 1, 2026
Website popularity band, not a count of readers or article views.
About this data
Counts cover the work we have indexed. Tone needs enough text and a confident classification. Excerpts and episode notes are not full articles or transcripts.
Identity or attribution wrong? Suggest a correction.