May 2023

Many companies use machine learning algorithms and artificial intelligence (AI) to assist with employment decisions and tenant screening. In our final episode, Stephen Piepgrass and colleagues Ron Raether and Dave Gettings examine the use and impact of AI in background screening, including the potential risks companies may face with increased reliance on AI.

On May 23, 49 state attorneys general sued Avid Telecom, its owner, and vice president for allegedly facilitating billions of robocalls in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The AGs requested civil penalties and to temporarily and permanently enjoin Avid from transmitting robocalls. This suit comes after group co-leader North Carolina AG Josh Stein formed a nationwide anti-robocall task force that investigates and takes legal action against companies responsible for routing significant volumes of illegal robocall traffic.

On May 19, Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes announced a consumer settlement with Response Marketing Group LLC and its principals for $15 million and a lifetime ban against selling money-making products and training services nationwide. The settlement — the largest ever for the Utah AG’s consumer protection division — concluded a case brought by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Utah AG’s office (representing the Utah Department of Commerce – Division of Consumer Protection (DCP)), alleging violations of the FTC Act, the Telemarketing Sales Rule, and several Utah statutes. Two Response Marketing celebrity endorsers also agreed to pay $1.7 million in redress cumulatively.

On May 17, District of Colombia Attorney General Brian Schwalb announced the settlement of an investigation into Easy Healthcare Corporation, requiring the company to change its privacy practices involving the ovulation tracking app “Premom” to protect the sensitive reproductive data of consumers. Easy Health agreed to several remedial measures intended to prevent the disclosure of sensitive information to third parties and to pay a $100,000 penalty to the states involved with the investigation.

On May 11, RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company, along with two convenience stores and the American Petroleum and Convenience Store Association, sued the California attorney general and district attorney for Fresno County in their official capacities, seeking declaratory relief that these California officials misinterpreted and misapplied California’s ban on flavored tobacco products and incorrectly concluded that RJ Reynolds’ new products violate this ban.