In Landsman & Funk PC v. Skinder-Straus Associates, a split Third Circuit Court of Appeals panel on a consolidated appeal of three class actions held that the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) provides diversity jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ private Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) claims. The TCPA provides a private right of action for recipients of unsolicited facsimiles with statutory damages of $500 per violation. Based on allegations that defendants sent over 10,000 unsolicited fax advertisements in violation of the TCPA, plaintiffs requested over $5 million in damages. The court held that, although under Third Circuit precedent the TCPA divested the district court of federal question jurisdiction over the claims, the district court could exercise diversity jurisdiction under CAFA, which provides federal courts with original jurisdiction over class actions with minimal diversity and an aggregate amount in controversy exceeding $5 million. The court found that each of the three cases under appellate review met the CAFA criteria. Relying on the Second Circuit’s 2006 opinion in Gottlieb v. Carnival Corporation, the court concluded that “it would take a ‘clear and definitive’ directive from Congress to persuade us ‘to remove a party’s entitlement to a federal forum based on diversity,’” and that the TCPA did not contain such a clear directive. The concurring opinion agreed that diversity jurisdiction existed, but believed that the same rationale supported the conclusion that federal courts could also exercise federal question jurisdiction over TCPA claims. The dissent believed that Congress clearly designated the “courts of that State” as the forum for all TCPA claims, therefore, federal courts could not entertain the claims. On May 17, 2011, the Court granted petitions for rehearing en banc.