Court Should Deny AMR's Move to Strike Class Allegations in TCPA Suit: Plaintiff

The court should deny A Marketing Resource’s motion to strike plaintiff’s class allegations in a Telephone Consumer Protection Act class action, said a Friday response (docket 2:22-cv-01464) in U.S. District Court for Eastern Wisconsin in Milwaukee. Zoulek was responding to the Gannett company’s March 3 motion to strike allegations due to a subscriber’s previous business relationship with its newspapers (2303070051). Plaintiff Jean Zoulek, a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel subscriber for 40 years, canceled her subscription in June and soon began receiving phone calls from AMR asking her to renew, even after she communicated do-not-call requests, said the complaint. She seeks an award of actual and/or statutory damages and costs, legal fees and an injunction requiring the Gannett company to cease all unsolicited calling activity on behalf of herself, the do not call registry class and the company’s internal do not call class. AMR’s motion to strike class allegations is based on the "false premise” that at this stage of proceedings the court can “determinatively conclude” that membership in plaintiff’s classes “cannot be determined based on common, objective factual criteria” such as whether AMR’s business records reflect calls with a specific disposition code like “do not call,” said the response. “Based exclusively on the pleadings, AMR cannot establish that it will be impossible to certify the classes Plaintiff alleges regardless of the records AMR may maintain or the facts that Plaintiff may prove,” it said.