Telephone Consumer Protection Act-Class Action

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Seth Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services

Case No.: 25-2398

Officials: Kirsch, Pryor, and Maldonado, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Telephone Consumer Protection Act-Class Action

The plaintiffs brought a consolidated class action against a medical services company after receiving unsolicited marketing text messages and telephone calls promoting its home sleep tests. Although they attempted to stop the communications by replying “STOP” to text messages and registering their telephone numbers on the National Do-Not-Call Registry, the unwanted messages and calls continued. The plaintiffs sought monetary, injunctive, and declaratory relief, alleging violations of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 47 U.S.C. § 227, and the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act.

The Central District of Illinois considered the defendant’s motion to dismiss the TCPA claims. The defendant argued that the private right of action created by 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5) applies only to unwanted telephone calls and does not extend to text messages. Because the plaintiffs did not contend that their federal claims could proceed based solely on the alleged telephone calls, the district court concluded that the complaint failed to state a claim under the TCPA. Having dismissed the federal claims, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claim and dismissed the action.

The Seventh Circuit reviewed the dismissal de novo, considering whether the term “telephone calls” in § 227(c)(5) encompasses text messages and concluded that it does not. Relying on the statute’s text, context, and the ordinary public meaning of the term at the time of enactment, the court concluded that the provision authorizes private suits only for unwanted telephone calls, not text messages. The court further determined that neither the Federal Communications Commission’s interpretations nor prior decisions construing other provisions of the TCPA warranted a different result.

Affirmed.

Decided 07/14/26

Full Text