15 U.S.C. § 6151

National Do-Not-Call Registry

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Authority

The Federal Trade Commission is authorized under section 6102(a)(3)(A) of this title to implement and enforce a national do-not-call registry.

(b) Ratification

The do-not-call registry provision of the Telemarketing Sales Rule (16 C.F.R. 310.4(b)(1)(iii)), which was promulgated by the Federal Trade Commission, effective March 31, 2003, is ratified.

(Pub. L. 108–82, § 1, Sept. 29, 2003, 117 Stat. 1006.)Editorial NotesCodification

Section was formerly set out as a note under section 6102 of this title.

Section was enacted as part of Pub. L. 108–82, and not as part of the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act which comprises this chapter.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesShort Title of 2008 Amendment

Pub. L. 110–188, § 1, Feb. 15, 2008, 122 Stat. 635, provided that: “This Act [amending sections 6152 and 6154 of this title and enacting provisions set out as a note under section 6152 of this title] may be cited as the ‘Do-Not-Call Registry Fee Extension Act of 2007’.”

Pub. L. 110–187, § 1, Feb. 15, 2008, 122 Stat. 633, provided that: “This Act [enacting section 6155 of this title] may be cited as the ‘Do-Not-Call Improvement Act of 2007’.”

Short Title

Pub. L. 108–10, § 1, Mar. 11, 2003, 117 Stat. 557, provided that: “This Act [enacting this chapter] may be cited as the ‘Do-Not-Call Implementation Act’.”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2012–2022 · leading case: ACA Int'l v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 885 F.3d 687 (D.C. Cir. 2018).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

ACA Int'l v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 885 F.3d 687 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “4 (b)(1)(iii)(B) ; see 15 U.S.C. § 6151 (a). This case does not concern the FTC's initiatives.”

Mims v. Arrow Fin. Servs., LLC, 132 S. Ct. 740 (2012). “See 15 U. S. C. §6151 (2006 ed., Supp. IV); 16 CFR §310.”

United States v. Dish Network LLC, 256 F. Supp. 3d 810 (C.D. Ill. 2017). “108-82, 117 , codified at 15 U.S.C. § 6151 . The Registry was scheduled to begin operations on October 1, 2003, but the start of operations was delayed to October 17, 2003.”

United States v. Dish Network LLC, 75 F. Supp. 3d 916 (C.D. Ill. 2014). “108-82, 117 , codified at 15 U.S.C. § 6151 ; see Mainstream, Mktg. Services, Inc.”

United States v. Dish Network, L.L.C., 75 F. Supp. 3d 942 (C.D. Ill. 2014). “108-82, 117 , codified at 15 U.S.C. § 6151 ; see Mainstream Mktg. Servs.”

Mims v. Arrow Fin. Servs., LLC, 565 U.S. 368 (2012). “See 15 U. S. C. § 6151 (2006 ed., Supp. IV); 16 CFR § 310.”

Moore v. Healthcare Solutions Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2022). “at ¶ 21; see also 15 U.S.C. § 6151 . He didn’t expect unwanted calls as someone with a number on the Do Not Call Registry.”

Mims v. Arrow Fin. Servs., LLC, 181 L. Ed. 2d 881 (2012). “See 15 U.S.C. § 6151 (2006 ed., Supp. IV); 16 CFR § 310.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.