Andrew Perrong loved bringing TCPA suits, at least it seems that way given how many he has filed–and how viciously he pursues them.

His latest suit ended in a sound defeat, however, and it is actually quite interesting.

In Perrong v. Montgomery County Democratic Committee, 2023 WL 4600423 (E.D. Pa. July 18, 2023) Perrong argued that texts he received encouraging him to vote for some Democrats were sent using a randomizer to select numbers from a pre-determined list. This seems to be a direct “footnote 7” issue and a decent argument.

Nonetheless the Court granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss finding, in essence, that using a randomizer to determine the sequence in which calls are made is NOT using an ROSNG to “store” telephone numbers, despite the Supreme Court’s seeming instruction to the contrary.

To get there the Court focused on the word “generator” in the definition–overlooking the words “store” or “produce”–and essentially followed Borden in concluding that only calls to randomly generated telephone numbers trigger the statute.

This is very good news for defendants–and particularly survey and polling companies who will, indeed, use randomized segments of pre-produced lists to conduct their research work. And it appears to be an issue of first impression. But I am not entirely sure this will hold up given the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Definitely one to keep an eye on.

Oh, and for the curious, the judge issuing the ruling was a Bush appointee–seemingly a Republican.