187426558_s

The recent final approval of a class action settlement in Johnson v. Comodo Group, Inc. demonstrates the substantial risks companies face when facing allegations of engaging in automated telemarketing without proper consent. On February 4, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey granted final approval to a $1,625,000 settlement resolving claims that Comodo Group violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) by making prerecorded telemarketing calls to consumers’ cell phones without their prior express written consent.

Plaintiff Michael Johnson initiated the class action in 2016, alleging that Comodo Group engaged in a “sophisticated sales practice” to market encrypted software using prerecorded voice messages without obtaining consent from the recipients. The TCPA expressly prohibits autodialed or prerecorded marketing calls to cellular telephones without the called party’s prior express written consent. 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii). Violations carry statutory damages of $500 per call, which can be trebled to $1,500 for willful violations.

This case exemplifies the marathon nature of TCPA class litigation. Over ten years, the parties engaged in extensive discovery and vigorously contested every phase of the litigation. Document productions consisted of not just audio recordings and call records, but also emails, contracts, system manuals, and the like.  The defendant unsuccessfully moved for summary judgment, sought to strike plaintiff’s expert testimony twice, moved to decertify the class, and pursued interlocutory appeal to the Third Circuit. Despite these efforts, the court certified a nationwide class of all persons who received prerecorded telemarketing calls from Comodo within four years of the complaint’s filing.

Of the 12,757 identified class members, 1,266 submitted valid claims.  The District Court noted that a 10.2% claims rate was “far above the median” for class actions. The average recovery per claiming member was $596.17, with distributions weighted by the number of unlawful calls received. The District Court emphasized that this recovery “is far above the average recovery for TCPA class settlements,” citing comparable cases where per-claimant recoveries ranged from approximately $14 to $160. No class members objected to the settlement, and none opted out.  The Court found this to be a powerful indicator of the settlement’s fairness.

Key Takeaways for Businesses

The Johnson decision reinforces several critical compliance considerations for any company engaged in telemarketing or automated outreach:

  • Document Consent: The TCPA requires prior express written consent for autodialed or prerecorded marketing calls to cell phones. Businesses must implement robust systems to capture, store, and verify consent before initiating such calls.
  • Understand the Stakes: With statutory damages of $500 to $1,500 per call, a telemarketing campaign reaching thousands of consumers can quickly generate exposure in the millions. As Johnson demonstrates, even a settlement representing a fraction of maximum potential liability results in substantial payouts.
  • Prepare for Prolonged Litigation: TCPA class actions are frequently hard-fought and resource-intensive. Companies should assess their compliance posture before litigation arises rather than after.

The Johnson v. Comodo Group settlement underscores that the TCPA remains a powerful consumer protection statute with real teeth. For businesses relying on telemarketing, ensuring proper consent protocols is not merely a best practice—it is a legal necessity.