With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Thus, while there does not appear to definitive evidence that Defendant used a predictive dialer to place its calls to Plaintiff, there is certainly enough evidence for a reasonable jury to find for Plaintiff on the issue. B. Consent Whether Plaintiffs TCPA claim can withstand Defendant’s summary judgment therefore turns on whether she has proffered evidence sufficient to enable a reasonable jury to find that she withdrew her consent to be contacted on her cellular telephone. [Doc. 56 at 3-4, f2(b)]. The Eleventh Circuit has considered revocation of consent within the context of the TCPA and determined that “Congress intended for the TCPA to incorporate the common-law meaning of consent, including its revocation.” Osorio v. State Farm Bank, F.S.B., 746 F.3d 1242, 1255 (11th Cir.2014) (<HOLDING>). The common-law understanding is that “consent

A: holding that because petitioner failed to demonstrate that she suffered substantial emotional distress after her lovers wife contacted her through social media and the telephone the trial court erred in granting the injunction against stalking
B: holding that relative to the threat that she posed physically separating tina cortez from her telephone taking her by the arm  escorting her from her home taking the keys to her home and locking the door and  placing her in the locked back seat of a patrol car was excessive force as well as an unlawful seizure under the fourth amendment
C: holding that against her will in the rape statute means without her consent and that the fact that the victim was under the age of consent was sufficient to establish that element
D: holding that even where a consumer has given her consent to be called on her cellular telephone she may orally revoke that consent such that continued calls to her cellular telephone using an automatic telephone dialing system will violate the tcpa
D.