People who kept getting Big 5 Sporting Goods marketing texts after asking them to stop may be covered by a proposed class action alleging Big 5 LLC ignored opt-out requests in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. No class has been certified and there is nothing to file yet.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. Big 5 LLC has not been found liable, there is no certified class, and there is nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Is This About?
Big 5 LLC was sued on October 19, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California over marketing texts signed “Big 5 Sporting Goods” and “Big 5.” The case is Juarez v. Big 5 LLC, No. 2:26-cv-12197. The complaint describes the defendant only as a Delaware limited liability company authorized to do business in California. Big 5 Sporting Goods, the El Segundo, California–based sporting goods chain, had about 410 stores in the western United States when it went private on October 2, 2025 through a merger with a partnership of Worldwide Golf and Capitol Hill Group. The complaint does not say how Big 5 LLC fits into that ownership structure.The complaint, brought by a Los Angeles County resident, says Big 5 kept texting the plaintiff promotions for months after the plaintiff asked it to stop. It claims that violates the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and a Federal Communications Commission rule on do-not-call requests. Big 5 has not responded, and the court has not ruled.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
What the Lawsuit Alleges
According to the complaint:- The plaintiff’s cell phone is their main personal number and takes the place of a home landline
- On or about December 28, 2025, at 7:24 p.m., the plaintiff replied to Big 5’s texts asking to opt out
- Big 5 ignored the request and kept texting the plaintiff, sending at least two more solicitations after it
- The texts advertised Big 5’s goods and were not informational or transactional
- The request was never processed, which the complaint says shows Big 5 lacks the written policy, staff training and do-not-call procedures FCC rules require
Screenshots attached to the complaint show the exchange. The plaintiff’s December 28 reply read “Please cease,” and an automated answer came back: “We don’t understand that. Text HELP for support or STOP to unsubscribe from marketing messages.” The thread from short code 54106 then shows more than 40 further promotional texts dated from January 5 into early October 2026, offering coupons and sales such as “Big 5: 20% OFF storewide!” Every text shown after the reply is time-stamped between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. None of the allegations has been tested in court.
The Rules the Complaint Relies On
The complaint’s single count is brought under the TCPA’s do-not-call section, 47 U.S.C. § 227(c), and FCC rule 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(d). That rule bars telemarketing calls to a residential subscriber unless the caller keeps internal do-not-call procedures, including a written policy, staff training and a record of each request to stop, honored within a reasonable time. The complaint quotes a version of the rule that allows up to 30 days; the version now in the Code of Federal Regulations sets a limit of 10 business days. Section 64.1200(e) applies the rule to cell phones. Under § 227(c)(5), a person who receives more than one violating call within 12 months can sue for up to $500 per violation, and a court may triple that for a willful or knowing violation.The complaint’s caption and opening paragraphs also cite the FCC’s quiet-hours rule, § 64.1200(c)(1), which bars telephone solicitations before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m. local time, and its request for an injunction mentions those hours. It does not identify any Big 5 text sent outside that window, and it brings no separate quiet-hours count.
The complaint describes the December 28 reply as a stop instruction. A separate FCC rule on revoking consent treats replies such as “stop,” “quit,” “cancel” and “unsubscribe” as valid, and says a reply in other words counts if a reasonable person would understand it as a request to stop. The complaint does not cite that rule. Courts also disagree on whether a text is a “call” under § 227(c)(5). On July 14, 2026, in Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services, the Seventh Circuit held that it is not, as explained in OCA’s report on that ruling. California is in the Ninth Circuit, where that decision is not binding.
Who Is in the Proposed Class?
The complaint proposes one nationwide class, which it calls the TCPA Opt Out Class: people in the United States who, from four years before the case was filed through class certification, were sent more than one Big 5 telephone solicitation text within a 12-month period on a cell number they use as a residential line, where at least one of those texts came after they opted out. Big 5, its parents, subsidiaries and affiliates, their officers, directors, agents, employees and attorneys, and those people’s immediate families are excluded. The complaint estimates the class at least in the dozens and likely in the hundreds or thousands. A court would have to certify the class before anyone is formally part of the case.What the Lawsuit Seeks
The complaint asks the court to certify the class and award statutory damages of up to $500 per violation, or actual losses if greater, with treble damages for each willful or knowing violation. It also asks for an order barring Big 5 from conduct that violates the TCPA, including solicitations before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m., plus costs and interest, and it demands a jury trial. Those are requests, not amounts anyone has been awarded.What Happens Next
Big 5 must be served and respond to the complaint. Defendants in similar cases have often moved to dismiss, and whether a class is ever certified is a separate, later question. If the case reaches a class settlement, a court-approved notice would explain who qualifies and how claims work. Suits over texts that allegedly continued after a stop request have also been filed against TikTok and AT&T, and every TCPA case OCA follows is listed on the TCPA class actions page.Questions
Is there a Big 5 Sporting Goods text message class action?
A proposed class action, Juarez v. Big 5 LLC, No. 2:26-cv-12197, was filed on October 19, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California over texts signed “Big 5 Sporting Goods” and “Big 5.” It is at the complaint stage. No class has been certified, there is no settlement, and there is nothing to claim.
What does the Big 5 text message lawsuit claim?
The complaint says a Los Angeles County resident asked Big 5 to stop texting them on December 28, 2025, and that Big 5 kept sending promotional texts anyway; the screenshots attached show more than 40 coupon and sale texts from January into October 2026. It argues this violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the FCC rule requiring companies to keep and honor an internal do-not-call list.
Who is in the proposed Big 5 class?
The complaint proposes a nationwide class of people who, from four years before the case was filed through class certification, were sent more than one Big 5 marketing text within 12 months on a cell number used as a residential line, where at least one text came after they opted out. A court has not certified the class.
How much money is the Big 5 lawsuit seeking?
The complaint asks for statutory damages of up to $500 per violation, tripled for willful or knowing violations, plus an order stopping the conduct, costs and interest. They are requests, not amounts anyone has been awarded.
Sources
• Class Action Complaint, Juarez v. Big 5 LLC, No. 2:26-cv-12197 (C.D. Cal., filed October 19, 2026), with Exhibit A screenshots: complaint (PDF) and docket.• Big 5 Sporting Goods Corporation, merger completion announcement (October 2, 2025).
• Telephone Consumer Protection Act: 47 U.S.C. § 227.
• FCC telemarketing and consent-revocation rules: 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200.
