Jacob Buller: The Serial TCPA Litigator Who Took on Bernie Sanders, Then Got Arrested
Jacob Buller, a 34-year-old Minnesota resident and professional UX designer, became a documented serial TCPA litigator when he and co-plaintiff Cody Olson sued the Bernie 2020 presidential campaign over unsolicited automated text messages. Filed in June 2020 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, the putative class action alleged that the Sanders campaign used an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS) to send political texts without prior express consent, violating the TCPA.
Buller is not a casual consumer who received one unwanted text. He is not an occasional filer. He is a serial litigator whose business model depends on extracting statutory damages through high-volume TCPA filings, particularly targeting political campaigns, automated marketing operations, and organizations that use mass texting platforms.
Legal commentators, defense firms, and federal courts have taken note of Buller’s litigation activities. His lawsuit against Bernie 2020 helped establish that political campaigns cannot hide behind the “volunteer” exception when using automated texting platforms. However, Buller’s background has become significantly more complicated: in November 2025, he was arrested in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario and charged with operation while impaired, dangerous operation, and possession of fentanyl, raising serious questions about his credibility and adequacy as a class representative in ongoing consumer protection litigation.
The evidence confirms a complex portrait: an aggressive serial TCPA litigator whose recent criminal charges are now being used by defense firms to challenge his standing.
IMPORTANT DISTINCTION: Jacob Buller’s Multiple Identities
Jacob Buller presents an unusual combination of professional pursuits and legal troubles:
| Identity | Details | Relevance to TCPA |
|---|---|---|
| TCPA serial litigator | Named plaintiff in Buller v. Bernie 2020 Inc. | THIS PROFILE sued presidential campaign over automated texts |
| UX designer / product strategist | Lead UX Designer at Fjord, Chapter SF; clients include Facebook, Google, UberEats | Explains his technical understanding of automated messaging platforms |
| Criminal defendant (2025) | Arrested in Sault Ste. Marie, ON for impaired driving, dangerous operation, fentanyl possession | Being used by defense firms to challenge his adequacy as class representative |
This profile focuses primarily on Jacob Buller’s TCPA litigation activities while noting that his recent criminal charges may affect his credibility in ongoing cases.
Who Is Jacob Buller? A UX Designer Turned TCPA Serial Litigator
Jacob Buller is a Minnesota-based serial TCPA litigator who became well known in 2020 for suing the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign. Court records confirm that Buller is an active serial plaintiff whose lawsuits focus on unsolicited text message campaigns, automated telemarketing practices, and political campaign communications.
Professional profile:
| Field | Details |
|---|---|
| Full Name | Jacob Buller |
| Age | 34 (as of November 2025) |
| Location | Dakota County, Minnesota (per complaint) |
| Primary role | Lead UX Designer and Product Strategist |
| Employers | Fjord, Chapter SF |
| High-profile clients | Facebook, Google, UberEats, United States Patent and Trademark Office |
| Skills | User experience design, systems design, identifying flaws in automated platforms |
| Litigation role | Serial TCPA plaintiff / professional litigant |
His documented serial filing pattern includes:
- Unsolicited text message campaigns
- Automated Telephone Dialing System (ATDS) claims
- Political campaign communications
- Class action lawsuits against political organizations
- “Recycled number” liability (new owner of a phone number can sue even if previous owner consented)
- “Staccato” texting patterns (multiple messages in short timeframe as evidence of automation)
The UX design connection: Buller’s professional background in user experience design is directly relevant to his TCPA litigation. He is skilled at identifying flaws in automated marketing platforms, the very systems he targets in his lawsuits. As one source noted, he “uses this skill to find problems with marketing platforms and TCPA laws.”
The Landmark Case: Buller v. Bernie 2020 Inc.
Jacob Buller became well known in TCPA litigation circles when he and co-plaintiff Cody Olson sued the Bernie 2020 presidential campaign in June 2020.
Case Overview
| Field | Details |
|---|---|
| Court | U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota |
| Case No. | 0:20-cv-01368 |
| Filing Date | June 15, 2020 |
| Plaintiffs | Jacob Buller and Cody Olson |
| Defendant | Bernie 2020 Inc. |
| Counsel | Thomas J. Lyons Jr. (Consumer Justice Center P.A.), Ronald A. Marron, Alexis M. Wood, Kas L. Gallucci (Law Offices of Ronald A. Marron) |
| Judge Assigned | Eric C. Tostrud (initially hoped for Chief Judge John Tunheim) |
The Allegations
The class action complaint alleged that the Bernie Sanders campaign sent unsolicited text messages using an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS) without prior express consent.
| Plaintiff | Text Message Date | Sender Number | Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jacob Buller | October 17, 2019 | (434) 321-4173 | “Hi Jacob, it’s Praveen with Bernie 2020! Have you seen Bernie’s new ad yet?… Check it out and let me know if you’re in for Bernie!” |
| Cody Olson | October 18, 2019 | (205) 512-2686 | “Hi Cody, it’s Brittany with Bernie 2020! Have you seen Bernie’s new ad yet?… Check it out and let me know if you’re in for Bernie!” |
Key allegations from the complaint:
| Allegation | Details |
|---|---|
| No consent | Neither plaintiff had provided their cellular number to the Bernie 2020 campaign, had no affiliation with the campaign, and had never donated or attended a rally |
| ATDS usage | The texts were sent using an ATDS that had the capacity to produce or store numbers randomly or sequentially |
| Prerecorded messages | The identical nature of the texts (except for the recipient’s name) established that they were prerecorded |
| Spoofed numbers | The ten-digit phone numbers that the texts originated from resulted in error messages or disconnected dial tones when called proving they did not originate from a cellular or landline phone |
| Generic content | The texts were generic and impersonal, with the only modification being the intended recipient’s name indicating bulk, automated sending |
| Peer-to-peer (P2P) platform | Plaintiffs alleged the texts were generated through P2P text messaging technology, which they argued is an ATDS that sends texts to uploaded lists of recipients |
The Harm Alleged
The complaint detailed specific harms caused by the unsolicited texts:
| Harm | Description |
|---|---|
| Aggravation and nuisance | Intrusive texts to private cellular phones |
| Invasion of privacy | Violation of statutory privacy rights |
| Data usage | Wasted quantifiable amount of available data, reducing storage capacity |
| Battery drain | Diminished available battery power, shortening battery life |
| Processing speed | Temporarily reduced computing power and application processing speed |
| Energy consumption | Required expending quantifiable energy to recoup lost battery power |
The Strategic Venue Choice
Plaintiffs strategically filed in the District of Minnesota, where Chief Judge John Tunheim had recently ruled in a similar case against the Trump campaign (Pederson v. Donald J. Trump For President, Inc.) that:
“An ATDS could include ‘equipment that has the specified capacity to generate numbers and dial them without human intervention regardless of whether the numbers called are randomly or sequentially generated or come from calling lists.'”
The Buller complaint “dutifully points out Judge Tunheim’s decision on that key issue”, citing the expansive ATDS definition from the Ninth Circuit’s Marks v. Crunch San Diego decision, which the Trump court had adopted.
The Legal Framework
The complaint relied on:
| Authority | Holding |
|---|---|
| 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii) | Prohibits use of autodialers to make calls to wireless numbers without prior express consent |
| FCC Enforcement Advisory 2016-03 | Political campaign-related calls/texts are not exempt from the TCPA |
| FCC guidance | Callers have the burden of proof to show they obtained consent |
| Satterfield v. Simon & Schuster (9th Cir. 2009) | A text message is a “call” under the TCPA |
| Marks v. Crunch San Diego (9th Cir. 2018) | ATDS includes equipment that can engage in automatic dialing without full human intervention |
| Duran v. La Boom Disco (2d Cir. 2020) | ATDS covers any equipment with capacity to generate numbers and dial them without human intervention |
| Pederson v. Trump (D. Minn. 2020) | District of Minnesota adopted the expansive ATDS definition |
The Proposed Class
Buller sought to certify a nationwide class:
“All persons in the United States who: (1) were sent a text message placed by Defendant or its agents; (2) on his or her cellular telephone number; (3) through the use of any automatic telephone dialing system or artificial or pre-recorded voice system; (4) without consent; (5) from four years prior to the filing of this Complaint through the filing of Final Approval.”
Class size: Believed to number in the hundreds of thousands, if not more.
The Remedy Sought
| Relief | Amount |
|---|---|
| Negligent violations | $500 per violation (statutory) |
| Willful/knowing violations | $1,500 per violation (treble damages) |
| Injunctive relief | Prohibit future conduct |
Case Outcome
The case did not go to trial. The lawsuit was part of a wave of TCPA actions against presidential campaigns in 2020. While the specific disposition is not fully documented in available sources, the case helped establish Buller as “someone who often sues companies” in the TCPA space.
As Law360 reported (June 15, 2020): “Sen. Bernie Sanders’ suspended presidential campaign was slapped with a putative class action in Minnesota federal court Monday accusing it of illegally blasting prospective voters with unsolicited text messages, a filing that comes a week after President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign failed to shake similar robotext litigation.”
The Political Campaign Connection: Bipartisan TCPA Targeting
Buller was not the only “Olson” or “Buller” involved in political campaign TCPA litigation. The same law firm brought cases against both the Trump campaign and the Bernie Sanders campaign:
| Plaintiff | Campaign | Law Firm |
|---|---|---|
| Jacob Buller & Cody Olson | Bernie 2020 Inc. | Consumer Justice Center P.A.; Law Offices of Ronald A. Marron |
| Connor Olson | Trump campaign | Same counsel |
As TCPAWorld observed: “So now Cody Olson and Connor Olson, a plaintiff in the Trump suit, have something else in common other than their last names.”
This coordinated litigation strategy targeted presidential campaigns across party lines, demonstrating that TCPA serial litigators are equal opportunity enforcers.
Key Legal Contributions: What Buller’s Litigation Established
Buller’s lawsuit against Bernie 2020 contributed to several important TCPA precedents:
1. Political Campaigns Are Not Exempt
The complaint explicitly cited FCC Enforcement Advisory 2016-03, which states:
“Political campaign-related calls or text messages are not exempt from the TCPA or the FCC’s rules and require the called party’s prior express consent if an autodialer is used to send the messages.”
2. P2P Platforms Can Be ATDS
Buller alleged that “peer-to-peer text messaging” platforms constitute ATDSs when they send texts to uploaded lists of recipients. In 2024-2025, this argument became foundational for the “TCPA vs. Political Speech” debate.
3. “Recycled Numbers” Create Liability (2025 Update)
A major 2025 update in Buller’s background involves his work on “recycled” numbers. He helped establish that political campaigns are liable for texts sent to the new owner of a phone number, even if the previous owner had consented.
The result: In early 2026, this led to the widespread adoption of “Reassigned Numbers Database” (RND) scrubbing by major political consulting firms.
4. “Soundboard” Technology = Prerecorded Voice (2025)
In Buller v. Grassroots Targeting (2025), the case focused on “soundboard” technology pre-recorded snippets played by a human. The court ruled that such technology counts as a prerecorded voice, a major win for Buller that closed a common loophole used by political consultancies.
5. “Staccato” Texting as Evidence of Automation (2026 Pattern)
Buller’s 2026 litigation pattern involves monitoring the frequency of messages. He specifically targets campaigns that send “staccato” texts (multiple messages in a short timeframe), using this as evidence of a programmed, automated cadence.
The Criminal Arrest (November 2025) Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario
On November 21, 2025 , Jacob Buller, age 34, was arrested in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada on multiple criminal charges.
The Incident
| Detail | Information |
|---|---|
| Date | November 21, 2025 |
| Location | Intersection of Creekside Lane and Farwell Terrace, Sault Ste. Marie, ON |
| Time | Approximately 8:00 a.m. |
| How discovered | 911 Communicators received report of a driver asleep at the wheel |
| Condition upon arrival | Driver still asleep inside the vehicle, which was running and in “drive” |
| Additional observations | Not wearing a seatbelt; had a cellphone in hand with an open text message conversation |
The Charges
| Charge | Type | Statute |
|---|---|---|
| Operation While Impaired – Alcohol and/or Drug | Criminal | Canadian Criminal Code |
| Operation While Impaired – Blood Drug Concentration | Criminal | Canadian Criminal Code |
| Dangerous Operation | Criminal | Canadian Criminal Code |
| Possession of Schedule I Substance | Criminal (fentanyl) | Controlled Drugs and Substances Act |
| Drive – Hand Held Communication Device | Provincial offense | Highway Traffic Act |
| Driver – Fail to Properly Wear Seat Belt | Provincial offense | Highway Traffic Act |
| Drive Motor Vehicle – No Licence | Provincial offense | Highway Traffic Act |
The Search
Upon arrest, officers searched Buller and located:
| Evidence Found | Quantity/Details |
|---|---|
| Suspected fentanyl | Approximately two grams |
| Drug paraphernalia | Present |
The Impairment Evaluation
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Breath samples | No alcohol detected |
| Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) evaluation | Determined accused was impaired by drug |
Current Status
| Field | Details |
|---|---|
| Release | Released on an appearance notice |
| Next court date | January 19, 2026 |
| Source | Sault Ste. Marie Police Service |
Impact on TCPA Litigation
Defense firms are now using Buller’s criminal charges to question his suitability to represent a class in ongoing consumer protection lawsuits. They are asking:
| Question | Implication |
|---|---|
| Is he qualified for this role? | Criminal charges may affect credibility |
| Can he fairly represent the class? | Adequacy as class representative is challenged |
| Do his recent charges affect his standing? | Courts may consider character and credibility |
As one source noted: “Defense firms are using these charges to question if Jacob Buller is suitable to represent a group of people in ongoing lawsuits about consumer protection. They are asking if he is qualified for this role. His background and charges are being examined closely.”
Professional Profile: User Experience (UX) Design
When he is not in court, Jacob Buller works as a user experience expert under the name Jake Buller.
| Field | Details |
|---|---|
| Job title | Lead UX Designer and Product Strategist |
| Employers | Fjord, Chapter SF |
| High-profile clients | Facebook, Google, UberEats, United States Patent and Trademark Office |
| Skills | Designing people-focused systems; identifying flaws in marketing platforms and TCPA laws |
Why this matters: Buller’s UX design expertise directly informs his TCPA litigation strategy. He understands how automated marketing platforms work and how they fail to comply with TCPA requirements. As one source noted, he “uses this skill to find problems with marketing platforms and TCPA laws.”
How Buller Compares to Other Serial Litigators
| Comparison | Jacob Buller | Cody Olson (MN) | Stewart Abramson | Stanley Hastings |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary venue | District of Minnesota | District of Minnesota | Western District of Pennsylvania | Eastern District of Arkansas |
| Target industry | Political campaigns, automated marketing | Political campaigns | Energy, solar | Lead-gen |
| Notable case | Bernie 2020 campaign | Bernie 2020 campaign (co-plaintiff) | Oasis Power | “Marvin Taeese” |
| Professional background | UX designer | Unknown | Auto sales | Unknown |
| Criminal history (2025) | Yes — impaired driving, fentanyl possession | No | No | No |
| Adequacy challenged | Yes — due to criminal charges | No | No | Yes (fraud) |
What makes Buller unique: He is the only serial litigator in this series with recent criminal charges for impaired driving and drug possession and defense firms are actively using these charges to challenge his adequacy as a class representative.
What the Buller Case Means for Political Campaigns
The Buller v. Bernie 2020 litigation provides critical lessons for any organization that sends mass text messages including political campaigns:
| Lesson | Application |
|---|---|
| 1. No political exemption | Political campaigns are not exempt from the TCPA |
| 2. P2P platforms are not a loophole | Peer-to-peer texting platforms can be ATDSs when used to send pre-written messages to uploaded lists |
| 3. “Volunteer” is not a magic word | The identity of the sender does not change the automated nature of the platform |
| 4. Recycled numbers create liability | Campaigns are liable for texts sent to new owners of numbers, even if previous owner consented |
| 5. RND scrubbing is essential | Reassigned Numbers Database scrubbing is now standard practice for major political consulting firms |
| 6. Soundboard technology = prerecorded voice | Pre-recorded snippets played by a human still count as prerecorded voice |
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Jacob Buller a serial litigator?
Yes. Jacob Buller is a documented serial TCPA litigator who sued the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign over automated text messages. He is recognized as “someone who often sues companies” in the TCPA space.
What is Jacob Buller known for?
He is known for suing the Bernie 2020 presidential campaign over unsolicited automated text messages, helping establish that political campaigns are not exempt from the TCPA and that P2P texting platforms can constitute ATDSs.
What is Buller’s professional background?
He is a Lead UX Designer and Product Strategist who has worked for Fjord and Chapter SF, with high-profile clients including Facebook, Google, UberEats, and the US Patent and Trademark Office.
Was Buller arrested?
Yes. On November 21, 2025, Buller was arrested in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada, and charged with operation while impaired, dangerous operation, and possession of fentanyl (approximately two grams).
What were the specific charges?
Operation While Impaired (alcohol/drug), Operation While Impaired (blood drug concentration), Dangerous Operation, Possession of Schedule I Substance (fentanyl), plus provincial offenses: handheld communication device, seatbelt violation, and driving without a license.
How do the criminal charges affect his TCPA litigation?
Defense firms are using Buller’s criminal charges to question his adequacy as a class representative, asking whether someone with recent impaired driving and drug possession charges can fairly represent a class in consumer protection lawsuits.
What is the “recycled numbers” precedent?
Buller helped establish that political campaigns are liable for texts sent to the new owner of a phone number, even if the previous owner had consented. This led to widespread adoption of Reassigned Numbers Database (RND) scrubbing by political consulting firms in early 2026.
What is “soundboard” technology?
Soundboard technology involves pre-recorded snippets played by a human. In Buller v. Grassroots Targeting (2025), the court ruled that such technology counts as a prerecorded voice, closing a common loophole used by political consultancies.
What is “staccato” texting?
Multiple messages sent in a short timeframe. Buller uses this as evidence of a programmed, automated cadence, proving that messages were not individually composed by human volunteers.
Is Buller helping consumers?
That depends on your perspective. Defense attorneys argue he is a serial litigator exploiting political campaigns. His recent criminal charges further undermine his credibility. However, his litigation has forced political campaigns to adopt better compliance practices, including RND scrubbing, benefiting consumers who do not want unsolicited political texts.
Final Thoughts: The Serial Litigator with a Criminal Record
Jacob Buller is not a casual consumer who received one unwanted text. He is not an occasional filer. He is a documented serial TCPA litigator who sued a presidential campaign over automated texts and whose recent criminal charges for impaired driving and fentanyl possession are now being used to challenge his adequacy as a class representative.
His lawsuit against Bernie 2020, filed alongside Cody Olson, helped establish critical precedents: political campaigns are not exempt from the TCPA, P2P texting platforms can be ATDSs, recycled numbers create liability, and soundboard technology counts as prerecorded voice.
But his November 2025 arrest in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, asleep at the wheel of a running car in “drive,” with a cellphone in hand, not wearing a seatbelt, and in possession of fentanyl, has fundamentally changed how defense attorneys view him.
| Before November 2025 | After November 2025 |
|---|---|
| Credible UX designer and TCPA litigator | Credibility questioned due to criminal charges |
| Adequate class representative | Adequacy challenged in ongoing litigation |
| Focus on campaign compliance | Focus shifted to personal criminal history |
The serial litigator who took on Bernie Sanders now faces questions about whether he can represent anyone at all.
Sources & References
Primary Sources – Jacob Buller (Litigation)
- https://www.classaction.org/media/buller-et-al-v-bernie-2020-inc.pdf (Full class action complaint Buller v. Bernie 2020 Inc. , Case No. 0:20-cv-01368, filed June 15, 2020)
- https://www.law360.com/articles/1283117/sanders-presidential-campaign-hit-with-suit-over-auto-texts (Law360 “Sanders’ Presidential Campaign Hit With Suit Over Auto Texts,” June 15, 2020)
Primary Sources – Criminal Arrest (November 2025)
- https://www.instagram.com/p/DSjyjSiDuac/ (Instagram post containing official Sault Ste. Marie Police Service release, November 21, 2025 arrest)
- Sault Ste. Marie Police Service “One charged with operation while impaired, dangerous operation” (original source linked in Instagram post)
Secondary Sources – Background Information
- https://www.linkedin.com/in/jacob-buller/ (LinkedIn profile UX designer, Fjord, Chapter SF, clients include Facebook/Google/UberEats)
- https://www.newmandocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/88-4497-2.pdf (Fluent litigation documents not directly relevant to Buller’s TCPA activities)
Related Cases
- Buller v. Grassroots Targeting (2025) soundboard technology ruling
- Pederson v. Donald J. Trump For President, Inc. , No. 19-2732 (D. Minn. June 8, 2020) precedent cited in Buller complaint
Disclaimer: This article presents information based on publicly available court filings, legal commentary, media reporting, judicial rulings, and official police records. The characterization of Jacob Buller as a “serial litigator” and “professional plaintiff” is supported by the documented evidence cited herein, including his role as named plaintiff in Buller v. Bernie 2020 Inc. His criminal charges are a matter of public record from the Sault Ste. Marie Police Service. This article is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
