We have written about the Eleventh Circuit’s controversial ruling in Salcedo v. Hanna, 936 F.3d 1162 (11th Cir. 2019). See Eleventh Circuit reinvigorates Spokeo in single text message TCPA case (Sep. 11, 2019). In Salcedo, the Eleventh Circuit concluded that receipt of a single, unsolicited text message did not constitute “concrete injury” sufficient to establish Article III standing, although the ruling was carefully limited to the allegations advanced in that case (the receipt of a single, unsolicited text message). The Salcedo decision has never been endorsed by another federal appellate court.

In the Eleventh Circuit, however, Salcedo has not only been followed but arguably extended. In Drazen v. Pinto, 51 F.4th 1354 (11th Cir. 2002), a panel of the Court of Appeals reversed a class settlement and remanded for further analysis of whether a single cellphone call sufficed to trigger Article III standing. See Eleventh Circuit holds that every class member must have standing for a class action settlement to be approved (Aug. 22, 2022).

On March 13, 2023, the Eleventh Circuit vacated the panel decision in Drazen and ordered the appeal to be reheard en banc. Drazen v. Godaddy.com, LLC, No. 21-10199, 2023 WL 2468505 (11th Cir. Mar. 13, 2023). This may portend a full reexamination of the Salcedo decision by the full Court of Appeals, or it may address only whether Salcedo properly should be extended from the “single text” context to the “single call” circumstances of Drazen. At a minimum, we expect many class action plaintiff groups to press the Eleventh Circuit to undo its uniquely restrictive standing requirements as imposed in Salcedo.