D. Or. · No. 3:26-cv-02342
Full docket on CourtListener ↗
No federal docket timeline hydrated for this case yet (state-court settlements have no RECAP docket).
| Matter | Type | Practice area | Court | Date | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| US Trichology, LLCsource ↗ filed by Perrong Law LLC · Judge Stacie F. Beckerman · No. 3:26-cv-02342 · 47:227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $29.50M–$76M ▾TCPA text/robocall claims split in recent appellate rulings: Howard v. RNC and Perrong v. Bradford were dismissed on technical scope grounds, while League of Women Voters v. Kramer survived MTD on similar robocall theory. Hulce v. Zipongo shows courts scrutinizing whether contacts were 'solicitations' requiring consent. Comparable settlements $29.50M–$76M median $36.20M · n=10 Caribbean Cruise L $76M · Dish Network $61M · US Coachways $49.90M Per member (realized): ~$20 median · $10–$500 (n=4) Comparable verdict: Dish Network, LLC $61M · ccAdvertising and Dr $32.42M Key precedent: Howard v. RNC (9th Cir.) — narrows TCPA prerecorded-voice text liability to calls beginning with the voice/audio, a frequent dismissal ground for text-based claims like this one. Main risk: Dismissal on definitional grounds (ATDS/prerecorded voice scope) as in Howard v. RNC, or reclassification as non-solicitation calls as in Hulce v. Zipongo Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $3K–$375K Small sample of appellate rulings and no defendant-specific litigation history; class size is a rough inference from limited revenue/web signals, not confirmed call/text volume. · grounded in 10 rulings, 10 settlements, 3 verdicts | Filing | Robocalls & Texts (TCPA) | D. Or. | 2026-10-23 | $29.50M–$76M comparable settlements |