18 U.S.C. § 2325

Definition

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar

In this chapter, the term “telemarketing or email marketing”—(1) means a plan, program, promotion, or campaign that is conducted to induce—(A) purchases of goods or services;(B) participation in a contest or sweepstakes;(C) a charitable contribution, donation, or gift of money or any other thing of value;(D) investment for financial profit;(E) participation in a business opportunity;(F) commitment to a loan; or(G) participation in a fraudulent medical study, research study, or pilot study,by use of one or more interstate telephone calls, emails, text messages, or electronic instant messages initiated either by a person who is conducting the plan, program, promotion, or campaign or by a prospective purchaser or contest or sweepstakes participant or charitable contributor, donor, or investor; and(2) does not include the solicitation through the posting, publication, or mailing of a catalog or brochure that—(A) contains a written description or illustration of the goods, services, or other opportunities being offered;(B) includes the business address of the solicitor;(C) includes multiple pages of written material or illustration; and(D) has been issued not less frequently than once a year,if the person making the solicitation does not solicit customers by telephone, email, text message, or electronic instant message, but only receives interstate telephone calls, emails, text messages, or electronic instant messages initiated by customers in response to the written materials, whether in hard copy or digital format, and in response to those interstate telephone calls, emails, text messages, or electronic instant messages does not conduct further solicitation.(Added Pub. L. 115–70, title IV, § 402(a)(2), Oct. 18, 2017, 131 Stat. 1213.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

A prior section 2325, added Pub. L. 103–322, title XXV, § 250002(a)(2), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2082; amended Pub. L. 107–56, title X, § 1011(d), Oct. 26, 2001, 115 Stat. 396, related to definition of “telemarketing”, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 115–70, title IV, § 402(a)(2), Oct. 18, 2017, 131 Stat. 1213.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesShort Title

Pub. L. 103–322, title XXV, § 250001, Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2081, provided that: “This Act [probably should be “title”, meaning title XXV (§§ 250001–250008) of Pub. L. 103–322, which enacted this chapter, amended sections 1029, 1341, and 3059 of this title, and enacted provisions set out as notes under this section and section 994 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure] may be cited as the ‘Senior Citizens Against Marketing Scams Act of 1994’.”

Information Network

Pub. L. 103–322, title XXV, § 250008, Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2088, as amended by Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, § 604(b)(29), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3508, provided that:“(a)Hotline.—The Attorney General shall, subject to the availability of appropriations, establish a national toll-free hotline for the purpose of—“(1) providing general information on telemarketing fraud to interested persons; and“(2) gathering information related to possible violations of provisions of law amended by this title [see Short Title note above].“(b)Action on Information Gathered.—The Attorney General shall work in cooperation with the Federal Trade Commission to ensure that information gathered through the hotline shall be acted on in an appropriate manner.”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2023 · leading case: United States v. Smith, 133 F.3d 737 (10th Cir. 1997).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Smith, 133 F.3d 737 (10th Cir. 1997). · cites it 2× “” 18 U.S.C. § 2325 . Mr. Smith characterizes his activity as a “donation approach,” denying there was either a “focus to sell goods or services” or an “inducement” to “participate in any contest or sweepstakes.”

United States v. John Wesley Scrivener, 189 F.3d 944 (9th Cir. 1999). “It based this conclusion, in part, upon the government’s argument that the Senior Citizens Against Marketing Scams Act (the “SCAMS Act”), 18 U.S.C. § 2325 et seq., manifests Congress’ view that the Sentencing Guidelines do not adequately punish defendants who target the elderly,…”

United States v. Baggett, 125 F.3d 1319 (9th Cir. 1997). “See 18 U.S.C. § 2325 (1)(A). 3 The MVRA’s amendments to the SCAMS Act apply to appellants unless barred by the Ex Post Facto Clause.”

State v. Townsend, 865 P.2d 972 (Idaho 1993). “In Yaies, the defendants were convicted of conspiracy to violate the Smith Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2325 , by advocating the overthrow of the government by force and violence, and by organizing the Communist Party to advocate the violent overthrow of the government.”

United States v. Numisgroup Intern. Corp., 169 F. Supp. 2d 133 (E.D.N.Y 2001). · cites it 2× “Of those substantive mail fraud counts, the jury also found that Dupurton engaged in sales solicitations constituting telemarketing under 18 U.S.C. § 2325 with regard to Counts 5 and 10.”

Rossetti v. Saban (N.D. Ill. 2023). · cites it 2× “roup Holdings, LLC, d/b/a Cardinal Group Companies, Cardinal Group Management Midwest, LLC, and Alex O’Brien (together, “Defendants”), purporting to assert the following claims: (I) “740 ILCS 80/3 Illinois Frauds Act”; (II) “815 ILCS 505/ Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business…”

United States v. Coe, 71 F. Supp. 2d 894 (C.D. Ill. 1999). “18 U.S.C. §§ 2325 et seq. The SCAMS Act provides: A person who is convicted of an offense under section 1028, 1029, 1341, 1342, 1343, or 1344, or a conspiracy to commit such an offense, in connection with the conduct of telemarketing— (1) shall be imprisoned for a term of up.”

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.