Taco Bell Faces Federal TCPA Lawsuit Filed in Eastern California Court

A federal class action lawsuit filed against Taco Bell IP Holder LLC accuses the company of systematically ignoring customer opt-out requests and sending unsolicited marketing text messages in violation of federal telemarketing law.

Joseph Daisuke Yoshida filed the complaint on March 11, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. The case, docketed as 1:26-cv-01939, was filed by The Law Offices of Jibrael S. Hindi, PLLC, and a summons has been issued to the defendant. The case is classified under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, the 1991 federal statute that restricts automated text messages, prerecorded voice calls, and other forms of electronic telemarketing.

Court records describe the suit as a TCPA class action alleging that Taco Bell IP Holder LLC continued sending marketing text messages after recipients opted out, failed to maintain proper do-not-call procedures and training, and systematically ignored customer opt-out requests in violation of telemarketing regulations.

The Yoshida filing is the second federal TCPA class action against a Taco Bell entity in less than five months. Samantha Chautin filed a separate complaint on October 28, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, naming Taco Bell Corp. as defendant in case 6:25CV01632. That 11-page complaint alleges Chautin received a string of unwanted marketing texts despite never consenting to receive them. "Plaintiff did not give Defendant prior express consent or permission to deliver, or cause to be delivered, advertisement or marketing text messages to telephone number (337) 285-XXXX," the Chautin complaint states. "Plaintiff did not request information or promotional materials from Defendant." Chautin also alleges she registered her phone number with the National Do Not Call Registry on June 19, 2025, months before the texts arrived. She is represented by Andress Law Firm LLC of Lafayette, Louisiana, and Paronich Law PC of Hingham, Massachusetts.

The two cases name different corporate defendants. Yoshida's suit targets Taco Bell IP Holder LLC, while Chautin's targets Taco Bell Corp. The sources do not clarify the relationship between the two entities.

Under the TCPA, statutory damages range from $500 to $1,500 per violation, and plaintiffs may also seek injunctive relief. In a class action setting, those per-text figures can multiply quickly across thousands of alleged recipients.

TCPA defense attorney Tori Guidry of Troutman Amin, LLP, who wrote about the Chautin case on the legal commentary blog TCPAWorld, flagged a potential complication for the Louisiana plaintiff. The Chautin complaint does not allege that she was never a Taco Bell customer or that she made no purchase from the company within the preceding 18 months, an omission that could matter under a recent Arizona federal court ruling in Abboud v. Circle K Stores. That decision held that an "existing business relationship" sufficient to defeat certain TCPA claims can arise from any voluntary purchase made by a consumer. Guidry described the Chautin case as a reminder for companies to scrub marketing lists against the National Do Not Call Registry before sending promotional messages.

The Yoshida case remains in its earliest procedural stage, with no motions, court orders, or service-return filings yet reflected in available docket records.