throbber
Case: 1:21-cv-00069 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/05/21 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:1
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No.
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`Jury Trial Demanded
`
`
`
` x
`
`
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`x
`
`
`
`
`TYLER BAKER, on behalf of himself and
`others similarly situated,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ABBVIE INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`Nature of the Action
`
`1.
`
`Tyler Baker (“Plaintiff”) brings this class action lawsuit against AbbVie Inc.
`
`(“Defendant”) under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (“TCPA”), and its
`
`implementing regulations.
`
`2.
`
`Upon information and good faith belief, Defendant routinely and systematically
`
`violated 47 C.F.R. pt. 64.1200(c) and, in turn, 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5), by delivering more than one
`
`advertisement or marketing text message to residential or cellular telephone numbers registered
`
`with the National Do-Not-Call Registry (“DNC Registry”) without the prior express invitation or
`
`permission required by the TCPA.
`
`Parties
`
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Plaintiff is a natural person who at all relevant times resided in Underhill, Vermont.
`
`Defendant is incorporated under the laws of Delaware but maintains its corporate
`
`headquarters in North Chicago, Illinois.
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-00069 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/05/21 Page 2 of 12 PageID #:2
`
`
`
`
`
`5.
`
`Defendant is a global biopharmaceutical company that acquired Allergan plc
`
`(“Allergan”) in May 2020.1
`
`6.
`
`Through the Allergan acquisition, Defendant acquired Allergan’s portfolio of
`
`therapeutics, including “RESTASIS” branded eye drops for treatment of Chronic Dry Eye.2
`
`Jurisdiction and Venue
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5) and 28
`
`7.
`
`U.S.C. § 1331.
`
`8.
`
`Venue is proper before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) as Defendant
`
`maintains its corporate headquarters in this district.
`
`Factual Allegations
`
`9.
`
`Plaintiff is, and has been at all times relevant to this action, the regular and sole user
`
`of his cellular telephone number—(802)-XXX-2723.
`
`10.
`
`Plaintiff uses, and at all times relevant to this action used, his cellular telephone as
`
`his personal residential telephone number.
`
`11.
`
`In 2003, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) ruled that cellular
`
`telephone numbers that are placed on the DNC Registry are presumed to be residential. In Re Rules
`
`& Regulations Implementing the Tel. Consumer Prot. Act of 1991, 18 F.C.C. Rcd. 14014, 14039
`
`(2003).
`
`12.
`
`Plaintiff registered his cellular telephone number with the DNC Registry on or
`
`about November 4, 2004.
`
`
`1
`https://news.abbvie.com/news/press-releases/abbvie-completes-transformative-
`acquisition-allergan.htm (last visited Dec. 29, 2020).
`
`https://www.restasis.com/ (last visited Dec. 29, 2020).
`
`
`
` 2
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-00069 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/05/21 Page 3 of 12 PageID #:3
`
`
`
`
`
`13.
`
`On November 22, 2020, Plaintiff received the following four text messages on his
`
`cellular telephone from short code 72428:
`
`
`
`
`
`14.
`
`The next day, on November 23, 2020, Plaintiff received a similar text message from
`
`short code 72428:
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-00069 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/05/21 Page 4 of 12 PageID #:4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`15.
`
`Before texting “Stop” to remove himself from Defendant’s marketing list, Plaintiff
`
`received at least five text messages in all.
`
`16.
`
`All of Defendant’s text messages to Plaintiff advertised savings on RESTASIS
`
`(Cyclosporine Opthalmic Emulsion), one of Defendant’s eye care products.
`
`17.
`
`Several of Defendant’s text messages include a hyperlink that redirects to
`
`https://www.restasis.com/getting-started, which further advertises Defendant’s RESTASIS eye
`
`care product.
`
`18.
`
`The 72428 short code is a dedicated, vanity short code, registered to “Restasis
`
`Alerts” since March 2, 2017.3
`
`
`3
`See https://usshortcodedirectory.com/search/?shortcode-number=72428 (last visited Dec.
`29, 2020).
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-00069 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/05/21 Page 5 of 12 PageID #:5
`
`
`
`
`
`19.
`
`“A short code is a number with fewer digits than a phone number to which a text
`
`message can be sent. The five-or six-digit numbers are often promoted in traditional and digital
`
`advertising. Companies use these codes to bring customers into the branded experience through
`
`voting, surveys, sweepstakes, coupon offers, information updates, loyalty programs and alerts.”4
`
`20.
`
`“A dedicated short code is an SMS short code that is used and paid for exclusively
`
`by one brand. A dedicated short code is different from a shared short code, because a shared short
`
`code is used and paid for by multiple brands.”5
`
`21.
`
`“A vanity short code, is a 5-6 digit phone number that is specifically selected by a
`
`brand, rather than selected at random by the Common Short Code Administration (CSCA).”6
`
`22.
`
`Plaintiff did not give Defendant prior express consent to send text messages to his
`
`cellular telephone number.
`
`23.
`
`Plaintiff did not give Defendant prior express written consent to send text messages
`
`to his cellular telephone number.
`
`24.
`
`Upon information and good faith belief, and in light of the nature and character of
`
`the text messages at issue—standardized, impersonal, and consistent in structure and format—the
`
`advertisement and marketing text messages at issue were sent by Defendant using an automatic
`
`telephone dialing system.
`
`25.
`
`The text messages at issue were sent for non-emergency purposes.
`
`
`https://usshortcodes.com/faqs (last visited Dec. 29, 2020).
`
`https://usshortcodedirectory.com/faq/what-is-a-dedicated-short-code/ (last visited Dec. 29,
`
`https://usshortcodedirectory.com/faq/what-is-a-vanity-short-code/ (last visited Dec. 29,
`
`4
`
`5
`2020).
`
`6
`2020).
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-00069 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/05/21 Page 6 of 12 PageID #:6
`
`
`
`
`
`26.
`
`Upon information and good faith belief, the text messages at issue were sent
`
`voluntarily.
`
`27.
`
`The purpose of the text messages at issue was to advertise and to market
`
`Defendant’s business and products.
`
`28.
`
`Plaintiff did not give Defendant prior express invitation or permission to send
`
`advertisement or marketing text messages to his cellular telephone number.
`
`29.
`
`Plaintiff suffered actual harm as a result of the text messages at issue in that he
`
`suffered an invasion of privacy, an intrusion into his life, and a private nuisance.
`
`30.
`
`Upon information and good faith belief, Defendant sends advertising or marketing
`
`text messages, absent prior express consent or prior express written consent, to telephone numbers
`
`on the DNC Registry.
`
`31.
`
`Upon information and good faith belief, Defendant knew, or should have known,
`
`that Plaintiff registered his cellular telephone number with the DNC Registry.
`
`Class Action Allegations
`
`32.
`
`Plaintiff brings this action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, and as a
`
`representative of the following class:
`
`All persons throughout the United States (1) to whom AbbVie Inc. delivered, or
`caused to be delivered, more than one text message within a 12-month period,
`promoting AbbVie Inc.’s goods or services, (2) where the person’s residential or
`cellular telephone number had been registered with the National Do Not Call
`Registry for at least thirty days before AbbVie Inc. delivered, or caused to be
`delivered, at least two of the text messages within the 12-month period, (3) from
`four years prior to the filing of this complaint through the date of class certification.
`
`
`
`33.
`
`Excluded from the class is Defendant, its officers and directors, members of their
`
`immediate families and their legal representatives, heirs, successors, or assigns, any entity in which
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-00069 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/05/21 Page 7 of 12 PageID #:7
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant has or had a controlling interest, and any member of the class(es) certified in Weisbein
`
`v. Allergan, Inc., No. 8:20-cv-00801-FMO-ADS (C.D. Cal.).
`
`34.
`
`Upon information and belief, the members of the class are so numerous that joinder
`
`of all of them is impracticable.
`
`35.
`
`The exact number of class members is unknown to Plaintiff at this time and can
`
`only be determined through appropriate discovery.
`
`36.
`
`37.
`
`The class is ascertainable because it is defined by reference to objective criteria.
`
`In addition, the members of the proposed class are identifiable in that, upon
`
`information and belief, their telephone numbers, names, and addresses can be identified in business
`
`records maintained by Defendant and by third parties, including class members.
`
`38.
`
`39.
`
`Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the members of the class.
`
`To be sure, as it did for all members of the class, Defendant delivered solicitation
`
`text messages to Plaintiff’s telephone number more than thirty days after Plaintiff registered his
`
`telephone number with the DNC Registry.
`
`40.
`
`Plaintiff’s claims, and the claims of the members of the class, originate from the
`
`same conduct, practice, and procedure on the part of Defendant.
`
`41.
`
`Plaintiff’s claims are based on the same theories as are the claims of the members
`
`of the class.
`
`42.
`
`43.
`
`44.
`
`Plaintiff suffered the same injuries as the members of the class.
`
`Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the members of the class.
`
`Plaintiff’s interests in this matter are not directly or irrevocably antagonistic to the
`
`interests of the members of the class.
`
`45.
`
`Plaintiff will vigorously pursue the claims of the members of the class.
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-00069 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/05/21 Page 8 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`
`
`Plaintiff has retained counsel experienced and competent in class action litigation.
`
`Plaintiff’s counsel will assert, protect, and otherwise represent the members of the
`
`
`
`46.
`
`47.
`
`class.
`
`48.
`
`The questions of law and fact common to the members of the class predominate
`
`over questions that may affect individual members of the class.
`
`49.
`
`Among the issues of law and fact common to the class:
`
`a. Defendant’s conduct, pattern, and practice as it pertains to delivering
`
`advertisement and telemarketing text messages;
`
`b. Defendant’s practice of delivering text messages, for solicitation purposes, to
`
`telephone numbers already registered on the DNC Registry for more than thirty
`
`days;
`
`c. Defendant’s violations of the TCPA; and
`
`d. the availability of statutory penalties.
`
`50.
`
`A class action is superior to all other available methods for the fair and efficient
`
`adjudication of this matter.
`
`51.
`
`If brought and prosecuted individually, the claims of the members of the class
`
`would require proof of the same material and substantive facts.
`
`52.
`
`The pursuit of separate actions by individual members of the class would, as a
`
`practical matter, be dispositive of the interests of other members of the class, and could
`
`substantially impair or impede their ability to protect their interests.
`
`53.
`
`The pursuit of separate actions by individual members of the class could create a
`
`risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications, which might establish incompatible standards of
`
`conduct for Defendant.
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-00069 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/05/21 Page 9 of 12 PageID #:9
`
`
`
`
`
`54.
`
`These varying adjudications and incompatible standards of conduct, in connection
`
`with presentation of the same essential facts, proof, and legal theories, could also create and allow
`
`the existence of inconsistent and incompatible rights within the class.
`
`55.
`
`The damages suffered by the individual members of the class may be relatively
`
`small, thus, the expense and burden to litigate each of their claims individually make it difficult
`
`for the members of the class to redress the wrongs done to them.
`
`56.
`
`The pursuit of Plaintiff’s claims, and the claims of the members of the class, in one
`
`forum will achieve efficiency and promote judicial economy.
`
`57.
`
`There will be no extraordinary difficulty in the management of this action as a class
`
`action.
`
`58.
`
`Defendant acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the members
`
`of the class, making final declaratory or injunctive relief appropriate.
`
`Count I: Violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5)
`
`59.
`
`Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every factual allegation contained in
`
`paragraphs 1 through 58.
`
`60.
`
`A text message is a “call” as defined by the TCPA. See, e.g., Duran v. La Boom
`
`Disco, Inc., 955 F.3d 279, 280 n.4 (2d Cir. 2020) (“It is undisputed that ‘[a] text message to a
`
`cellular telephone . . . qualifies as a ‘call’ within the compass of [the TCPA].’”) (internal citation
`
`omitted); Satterfield v. Simon & Schuster, Inc., 569 F.3d 946, 954 (9th Cir. 2009).
`
`61.
`
`The TCPA’s implementing regulation, 47 C.F.R. pt. 64.1200(c), provides that “[n]o
`
`person or entity shall initiate any telephone solicitation” to “[a] residential telephone subscriber
`
`who has registered his or her telephone number on the national do-not-call registry of persons who
`
`do not wish to receive telephone solicitations that is maintained by the federal government.”
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-00069 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/05/21 Page 10 of 12 PageID #:10
`
`
`
`
`
`62.
`
`Part 64.1200(e) provides that parts 64.1200(c) and (d) “are applicable to any person
`
`or entity making telephone solicitations or telemarketing calls to wireless telephone numbers.”
`
`63.
`
`Any “person who has received more than one telephone call within any 12-month
`
`period by or on behalf of the same entity in violation of the regulations prescribed under this
`
`subsection may” may bring a private action based on a violation of those regulations, which were
`
`promulgated to protect telephone subscribers’ privacy rights to avoid receiving telephone
`
`solicitations to which they object. 47 U.S.C. § 227(c).
`
`64.
`
`Defendant violated 47 C.F.R. pt. 64.1200(c) by initiating, or causing to be initiated,
`
`telephone solicitations to telephone subscribers such as Plaintiff and the class members who
`
`registered their respective cellular or residential telephone numbers with the DNC Registry, which
`
`is a listing, maintained by the federal government, of persons who do not wish to receive telephone
`
`solicitations.
`
`65.
`
`Defendant violated 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5) because it delivered, or caused to be
`
`delivered, to Plaintiff and members of the class, more than one solicitation call or text message in
`
`a 12-month period in violation of 47 C.F.R. pt. 64.1200.
`
`66.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5) and 47 C.F.R. pt.
`
`64.1200, Plaintiff, and the members of the class, are entitled to damages in an amount to be proven
`
`at trial.
`
`Prayer for Relief
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays for relief and judgment as follows:
`
`A. Determining that this action is a proper class action, designating Plaintiff as class
`
`representative under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and designating
`
`Plaintiff’s counsel as class counsel;
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-00069 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/05/21 Page 11 of 12 PageID #:11
`
`
`
`
`
`B. Adjudging and declaring that Defendant violated 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5);
`
`C. Enjoining Defendant from continuing its violative behavior, including continuing to
`
`deliver solicitation text messages to telephone numbers registered with the DNC
`
`Registry for at least thirty days;
`
`D. Awarding Plaintiff and the members of the class damages under 47 U.S.C. §
`
`227(c)(5)(B);
`
`E. Awarding Plaintiff and the members of the class treble damages under 47 U.S.C. §
`
`227(c)(5)(C);
`
`F. Awarding Plaintiff and the class reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses under
`
`Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;
`
`G. Awarding Plaintiff and members of the class any pre-judgment and post-judgment
`
`interest as may be allowed under the law; and
`
`H. Awarding such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
`
`TRIAL BY JURY
`
`Plaintiff is entitled to and hereby demands a trial by jury.
`
`Dated: January 5, 2021
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Aaron D. Radbil
`Aaron D. Radbil
`Greenwald Davidson Radbil PLLC
`401 Congress Avenue, Suite 1540
`Austin, TX 78701
`Tel: (512) 322-3912
`aradbil@gdrlawfirm.com
`
`Jesse S. Johnson*
`Greenwald Davidson Radbil PLLC
`7601 N. Federal Highway, Suite A-230
`Boca Raton, FL 33487
`Tel: (561) 826-5477
`jjohnson@gdrlawfirm.com
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-00069 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/05/21 Page 12 of 12 PageID #:12
`
`
`
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff and the proposed class
`
`*to seek admission pro hac vice
`
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket