In Cherkaoui v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc., here, the District Court granted Santander’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff’s TCPA claim. The District Court found that the Plaintiff consented to be called on his cellular telephone by providing his cellular telephone number in his credit application for the purchase of a vehicle. Plaintiff offered self-serving testimony that he had revoked consent. The District Court disagreed, noting that Plaintiff had repeatedly verified that the cellular telephone number was an acceptable contact number. (cf Levy v. Receivables Performance Management, LLC— F.Supp.2d —-, 2013 WL 5310166 (E.D.N.Y. 2013) (“Although RPM argues that plaintiff should, nevertheless, be deemed to have provided prior express consent by virtue of the fact that he, at times, initiated calls to RPM and, at least on one occasion, verified the cell phone number from which he was calling, the fact of the matter is that plaintiff took no affirmative act rising to the level of prior express consent.”) (http://www.calautofinance.com/?p=4407) The District Court’s finding that Plaintiff’s statement was self-serving suggests that Plaintiff’s purported “oral” revocation was insufficient. (C.f. Osorio v. State Farm Bank, F.S.B.— F.3d —-, 2014 WL 1258023 (11th Cir. 2014)).