Ariz. Judge Denies Robocalling Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss State AGs’ Complaint

4:23-cv-00233). Defendants Michael Lansky, his company Avid Telecom and Stacey Reeves, Avid’s vice president-operations and sales, filed the motion. The judge also denied their motion to stay the case and refer the AGs’ claims to the FCC and FTC for expert review, said her Wednesday order. Jorgenson granted the plaintiffs leave to file an amended complaint within 14 days “to state an alter ego claim of individual liability” against defendant Lansky. Should the plaintiffs not amend their complaint, the defendants will have until June 14 to file an answer, said the order. The judge found there’s no merit to the defendants’ argument that as a matter of law, the plaintiffs’ TCPA claims fail because Avid can’t be found to have ever initiated any calls covered by the TCPA, it said. The defendants also provide no contrary law to that relied on by the plaintiffs, it said. The state AGs allege that Avid, Lansky and Reeves violated the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act, the Telemarketing Sales Rule, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and state laws in 11 states in facilitating billions of illegal robocalls for years via the company's VoIP services. They allege that Avid received more than 329 notifications from USTelecom's Industry Traceback Group, putting it on notice that it was transmitting illegal robocalls. They also allege that Avid, Lansky and Reeves "knew or consciously avoided knowing they were routing illegal robocall traffic." Robocalls are a "scourge,” said North Carolina AG Josh Stein (D) in a statement Thursday, one of the few AGs to weigh in on the judge's denial of the motion to dismiss. “I’m pleased the court agreed that the defendants’ attempt to dismiss the case was baseless," he said.