A judge in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan recently dismissed a do-not-call claim, finding the plaintiff’s phone number was used for business purposes at the time it was placed on the Do-Not-Call Registry — and thus the registration was void. Dobronski v. Tony Packo’s Toledo, LLC, No. 25-13117, 2026 WL 2969611 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 2, 2026). The decision provides a helpful reminder to investigate the full history of a plaintiff’s phone number at the outset, as that history could supply a complete defense at the pleading stage.
Plaintiff alleged that the defendant had sent him three telemarketing texts in 2025 to a number that was “residential” and had been placed on the Registry in 2003. The defendant moved to dismiss, pointing to public records and plaintiff’s prior litigation filings, which showed that his number had been used as a business line prior to registration and well after that (i.e., from 2001 through 2020). The plaintiff conceded these facts but stated that he had retired and had used the number exclusively for personal purposes since 2022 — years before he received the text messages at issue. The plaintiff relied on Shelton v. Professional Source Lending Group LLC, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46534 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 14, 2025) (Shelton II), which allowed do-not-call claims to proceed where a plaintiff had placed his personal number on the Registry, later used it for business purposes, and then resumed using the number as a personal line.
The court distinguished Shelton II. Critically, the plaintiff in that case had registered his number before starting his business, which made his registration of a personal number proper. By contrast, the plaintiff here had registered his number after he was already using it as a business line. Accordingly, the court held that the registration in 2003 was “void ab initio.”
This case illustrates how a plaintiff’s historical use of a phone number may preclude a later do-not-call claim. Defendants should not only investigate how a plaintiff is currently using a phone number, but also how a plaintiff used the number before and during the time of registration.
