D.D.C. · No. 1:26-cv-03831
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UPWARD ADVANCE LLCsource ↗ filed by GILBERT LLP · No. 1:26-cv-03831 · 47:227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $29.50M–$76M ▾TCPA robocall theory shows split outcomes: Howard, Perrong, and Hulce affirmed dismissals on technical statutory scope grounds, while League of Women Voters survived MTD on similar robocall allegations. Upward Advance is a small fintech lender, suggesting a modest class size relative to mega-settlements cited. 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: League of Women Voters v. Kramer (D.N.H.) - MTD denied on near-identical TCPA robocall claim, shows viable path past pleading stage. Main risk: Dismissal under Howard/Perrong-style narrow reading of 'artificial or prerecorded voice' or 'initiated' call requirements under 227(b)(1) Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $50K–$7.50M Defendant identity/scale uncertain from web signals (fintech vs. dating app overlap); no prior litigation history found; class size is a rough estimate. · grounded in 10 rulings, 10 settlements, 3 verdicts | Filing | Robocalls & Texts (TCPA) | D.D.C. | 2026-10-30 | $29.50M–$76M comparable settlements |