Federal Communications Commission DA 26-282 Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) ) Robocall Mitigation Database Filers ) EB-TCD-25-00038590 The investigation began under EB-TCD-24-00036891 and was subsequently assigned File No. EB-TCD-25- 00038590. Any future correspondence with the Commission concerning this matter should reflect the new case number. ORDER Adopted: March 24, 2026 Released: March 24, 2026 By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau: I. INTRODUCTION 1. By this Order, the Enforcement Bureau (Bureau) of the Federal Communications Commission (Commission or FCC) directs the thirty-five companies named in Appendix A (each, a Company; collectively, the Companies) to cure the deficiencies in each Company’s Robocall Mitigation Database certifications and notify the Bureau that the deficiencies have been cured; or to file a response explaining why the Bureau should not remove the Company’s certification from the RMD. See Call Authentication Trust Anchor, WC Docket No. 17-97, Sixth Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 38 FCC Rcd 2573, 2604, para. 60 (2023) (Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order). Each Company’s RMD certification is deficient because the certification, inclusive of its robocall mitigation plan, lacks required information. See 47 CFR § 64.6305(d)-(e). Removal of a Company’s certification from the RMD would require all intermediate providers and voice service providers For purposes of this order, we use the term “voice service provider” consistent with the definition of “voice service” in section 64.6300 of our rules. See 47 CFR § 64.6300(o). As such, the term “voice service provider” excludes intermediate providers (i.e., gateway providers and non-gateway intermediate providers), as those terms are defined in section 64.6300. See id. § 64.6300(d), (g), (i). to cease accepting all calls directly from the Company, apart from calls to 911 or other emergency numbers. See 47 CFR § 64.6305(g). Notwithstanding this requirement, “[a] provider may not block a voice call under any circumstances if the call is an emergency call placed to 911” and “must make all reasonable efforts to ensure that it does not block any calls from public safety answering points and government emergency numbers.” Id. at § 64.6305(g)(5). Each Company must provide its response to this Order to the Bureau no later than 14 days after the release of this Order. Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 2604, para. 60; 47 CFR §§ 1.4(b)(1), 1.103(a). II. BACKGROUND 2. The FCC established the RMD in 2020 to promote transparency and effective robocall mitigation. Call Authentication Trust Anchor, WC Docket No. 17-97, Second Report and Order, 36 FCC Rcd 1859, 1902, para. 82 (2020) (Second Caller ID Authentication Order). On March 16, 2023, the Commission adopted amendments to section 64.6305 of its rules in the Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order that enhanced the information requirements for RMD certifications, including by expanding the obligation to submit a robocall mitigation plan for new and existing filers. Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 2592-601, paras. 36-52. On May 18, 2023, the Commission adopted additional amendments to section 64.6305 in the Seventh Call Blocking Order that required all providers to include a commitment to respond fully to traceback requests within 24 hours in their RMD certification. Advanced Methods to Target and Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls, Call Authentication Trust Anchor, CG Docket No. 17-59, WC Docket No. 17-97, Seventh Report and Order in CG Docket 17-59 and WC Docket 17-97, Eighth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CG Docket 17-59, and Third Notice of Inquiry in CG Docket 17-59, 38 FCC Rcd 5404, 5422, para. 52 (2023) (Seventh Call Blocking Order). Both of these rule amendments took effect on February 26, 2024, and required all existing filers to update their RMD certifications to provide the newly required information, including the newly required or updated robocall mitigation plan by that same date. See Wireline Competition Bureau Announces Robocall Mitigation Database Filing Deadlines and Instructions and Additional Compliance Dates, WC Docket No. 17-97, Public Notice, 39 FCC Rcd 383, 383-87 (WCB 2024) (RMD Public Notice); Fed. Commc’ns Comm’n, Advanced Methods to Target and Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls, Call Authentication Trust Anchor, 89 Fed. Reg. 4833, 4833 (Jan. 25, 2024) (establishing February 26, 2024 as the effective date for the amendments to section 64.6305). 3. Under the amended rule, voice service providers, gateway providers, and non-gateway intermediate providers The Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order amended section 64.6305 to require non-gateway intermediate providers to file certifications in the RMD for the first time. See 47 CFR § 64.6305(f); Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 2593, para. 38; RMD Public Notice, 39 FCC Rcd at 384. must submit several pieces of information in their RMD certification. First, a provider must certify that all calls that it originates on its network are subject to a robocall mitigation program, that any prior certification has not been removed by Commission action and it has not been prohibited from filing in the RMD, and whether it has fully, partially, or not implemented STIR/SHAKEN on the Internet Protocol portions of its network. 47 CFR §§ 64.6305(d)(1), (e)(1), (f)(1); Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 2595, 2597, paras. 42, 46; RMD Public Notice, 39 FCC Rcd at 385. Second, the provider must upload a robocall mitigation plan that describes the specific reasonable steps the provider has taken to avoid originating, carrying, or processing illegal robocall traffic as part of its robocall mitigation program based on the role(s) it serves in the call chain, See Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 2593, para. 39; RMD Public Notice, 39 FCC Rcd at 385, 388. including: (a) a description of the affirmative, effective measures it is taking to prevent new and renewing customers from originating illegal robocalls (if it is a voice service provider); (b) a description of any call analytic system(s) that it utilizes, including those operated by a third-party vendor; and (c) a description of the procedures it is using to know its upstream providers. 47 CFR §§ 64.6305(d)(2)(ii), (e)(2)(ii), (f)(2)(ii); Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 2593-95, paras. 40-41; RMD Public Notice, 39 FCC Rcd at 386-87. Third, the provider must provide its business name, address, and other identifying information, including contact information for a person responsible for addressing robocall mitigation-related issues, and its principals, affiliates, subsidiaries, and parent companies. 47 CFR §§ 64.6305(d)(4), (e)(4), (f)(4); Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 2595-96, 2597, 2599, paras. 42-43, 46, 48; RMD Public Notice, 39 FCC Rcd at 385-86. Fourth, the provider must include certain other information, including: (a) the role it is playing in the call chain; (b) detailed information supporting any claimed STIR/SHAKEN implementation extension or exemption; (c) a statement whether it or any affiliated entity has been subject to a Commission or other law enforcement agency action or investigation in the prior two years due to suspected involvement with illegal robocalling or spoofing, or due to a deficiency in its RMD certification; and (d) the provider’s commitment to respond fully to traceback requests within 24 hours. 47 CFR §§ 64.6305(d)(2)(i), (iii), (iv), 64.6305(e)(2)(i), (iii), (iv), 64.6305(f)(2)(i), (iii), (iv); Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 2596-99, paras. 43-47; RMD Public Notice, supra note 7, at 385-86. 4. The Bureau may remove a certification from the RMD that is deficient. 47 CFR § 0.111(a)(28)(i); see Second Caller ID Authentication Order, 36 FCC Rcd at 1902-03, para. 83 (voice service provider certifications); Advanced Methods to Target and Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls, Call Authentication Trust Anchor, CG Docket No. 17-59, WC Docket No. 17-97, Sixth Report and Order in CG Docket No. 17-59, Fifth Report and Order in WC Docket No. 17-97, Order on Reconsideration in WC Docket No. 17-97, Order, Seventh Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CG Docket No. 17-59, and Fifth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in WC Docket No. 17-97, 37 FCC Rcd 6865, 6882, para. 40 (2022) (Gateway Provider Order) (gateway provider certifications); Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 2602-03, paras. 56-57 (non-gateway intermediate provider certifications). To do so, the Commission first contacts the provider, notifying it that its certification is deficient, explaining the nature of the deficiency, and giving the provider an opportunity to cure the deficiency. Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 2604, para. 60. If the provider fails to cure the deficiency, the Bureau will release an order finding that a provider’s certification is deficient based on the available evidence and direct the provider to, within 14 days, cure the deficiency in its certification and notify the Bureau that the deficiency has been cured, or explain why the Bureau should not remove the Company’s certification from the RMD. Id. If the provider fails to cure the deficiency or provide a sufficient explanation why its certification is not deficient within that 14-day period, the Bureau will release an order removing the provider’s certification from the RMD. Id. 5. Following the February 26, 2024 effective date of the amendments to section 64.6305, the Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) conducted a review of certifications in the RMD and identified providers that failed to update their RMD certifications with the required information by that date to comply with section 64.6305, as amended. WCB notified each Company on March 29, 2024, that its certification was noncompliant with section 64.6305 because the Company had failed to submit an updated RMD certification by the February 26, 2024 deadline. Email from Robocall Mitigation Database Team (Mar. 29, 2024) (on file in EB-TCD-24-00036891) (WCB Email). WCB’s notification informed each Company that it “must submit an updated certification [, including an] updated robocall mitigation plan[,] in the Robocall Mitigation Database by Monday, April 29, 2024.” Id. After this second deadline, the Companies still had not updated their RMD certification with the required information; as a result, WCB referred each Company to the Bureau to initiate removal proceedings. 6. On December 10, 2024, the Bureau released the December 2024 Show Cause Order, which required the 2,411 identified providers (including all of the Companies) to cure their deficient RMD certification and notify the Bureau that the deficiencies have been cured or explain why the Bureau should not remove the Company’s certification from the RMD. See 2,411 Robocall Mitigation Database Filers, EB-TCD-24-00036891, Order, 39 FCC Rcd 13318, 13321, paras. 1, 7-8 (EB 2024) (December 2024 Show Cause Order). None of the Companies responded. On August 25, 2025, the Bureau released an Order removing a total of 1,203 certifications listed in the December 2024 Show Cause Order (including all of the Companies) based on their failure to cure their deficient certifications (August 2025 RMD Order). See Robocall Mitigation Database Filers, EB-TCD-25-00038590, Order, 40 FCC Rcd 6009 (EB 2025) (August 2025 RMD Order). 7. Following the August 2025 RMD Order, the Commission received a large influx of outreach from recently removed providers seeking reinstatement. In an effort to minimize service disruptions to consumers, the Bureau and WCB provisionally reinstated certifications for certain providers (including the Companies) to the RMD. Provisional reinstatement was a special circumstance to the facts of the RMD removal proceeding that culminated in the August 2025 RMD Order. RMD filers should have no expectation that provisional reinstatements will be used in the future. In order to be eligible for provisional reinstatement, a removed provider needed to have emailed the Bureau to request reinstatement and attempted to revise its certification to cure the noted deficiencies. The Bureau advised the provisionally reinstated Companies that Commission staff may notify them of outstanding RMD certification deficiencies and require additional changes to their certifications. See, e.g., Email from RMD reinstatement address (RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov) (Aug. 29, 2025 5:06 PM EDT) (on file in EB-TCD-25-00038590). The Companies were made aware that certifications not brought into compliance with the Commission’s rules may be subject to removal from the RMD again. See id. Between September 15, 2025 and January 28, 2026, the Bureau notified each Company that its RMD certification was deficient and identified the specific deficiencies with the certification (Notification Emails). The date and time of the Notification Email for each Company is listed in Appendix A. The Notification Emails are on file in EB-TCD-25-00038590. See, e.g., Email from RMD reinstatement address (RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov) (Sept. 15, 2025 5:14 PM EDT). The Notification Emails instructed the Companies to address the identified deficiencies within 14 days and to respond to the Bureau’s email when they completed the revisions. The Notification Emails further noted: “Filings that are not brought into compliance with the Commission’s rules by the Company within 14 days may be subject to removal from the RMD again . . . .” See, e.g., Email from RMD reinstatement address (RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov) (Sept. 15, 2025 5:14 PM EDT). The Bureau did not receive responses to the Notification Emails from any of the Companies, and as of March 23, 2026, all of the Companies’ RMD certifications remain deficient. III. DISCUSSION A. The Companies’ Certifications Are Deficient Because They Lack Required Information. 8. Following the provisional reinstatement of each Company to the RMD as described above, the Bureau notified each Company of the outstanding deficiencies in its RMD certification and instructed each Company to update its certification to cure the deficiencies within 14 days. See Notification Emails. None of the Companies have brought their RMD certifications into compliance. Thus, each Company’s RMD certification, inclusive of its robocall mitigation plan, remains deficient because it lacks required information. See Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 2592-99, paras. 36-49. B. The Companies Must Cure or Face Removal from the RMD and Mandatory Call Blocking 9. The Bureau may remove deficient certifications from the RMD after providing sufficient notice and opportunity to cure. 47 CFR § 0.111(a)(28)(i); see Second Caller ID Authentication Order, 36 FCC Rcd at 1902-03, para. 83; Gateway Provider Order, 37 FCC Rcd at 6882, para. 40; Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 2602-2603, paras. 56-57; see also Viettel Business Solutions Co. et al., Order, 39 FCC Rcd 1319, 1319, para. 1 (2024) (removing certifications of 12 entities from the Robocall Mitigation Database after the entities were provided with notice and opportunity to cure, and an opportunity to show cause as to why the provider should not be removed); BPO Innovate, Order, 39 FCC Rcd 130, 130, para. 1 (2024) (directing BPO Innovate to show cause within 14 days as to why the provider should not be removed from the Robocall Mitigation Database after being provided with notice and opportunity to cure). We direct each Company to cure its deficient RMD certification and notify the Bureau that the deficiencies have been cured or explain why the Bureau should not remove the Company’s certification from the RMD. See Sixth Caller ID Authentication Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 2604, para. 60. This Order affords each Company a final opportunity to cure its deficient RMD certification by updating its certification to include all required information under the rules. Id. 10. Each Company shall file its response with the Bureau within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of this Order. Id. Failure to respond and correct the deficiencies or provide a sufficient explanation for why the Company’s certification should not be removed from the RMD will result in removal of the Company’s certification. See id. Removal of a Company’s certification from the RMD will require all intermediate and voice service providers to cease accepting calls directly from that Company. See 47 CFR § 64.6305(g). Notwithstanding this requirement, “[a] provider may not block a voice call under any circumstances if the call is an emergency call placed to 911” and “must make all reasonable efforts to ensure that it does not block any calls from public safety answering points and government emergency numbers.” Id. at § 64.6305(g)(5). If any Company’s certification is removed from the RMD, the Company shall not be permitted to refile unless and until both WCB and the Bureau consent. IV. ORDERING CLAUSES 11. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), 227, 227b, 251(e), and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i),154(j), 227, 227b, 251(e), and 403, and sections 0.111, 0.311, 1.1, and 64.6305 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR §§ 0.111, 0.311, 1.1, and 64.6305, this Order is ADOPTED. 12. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that each Company named in Appendix A SHALL FILE a written response to this Order within fourteen (14) calendar days from the release date of this Order. The written responses must either inform the Bureau that the Company has corrected the deficiency in its RMD certification or explain why its certification is not deficient. 13. The responses must be mailed to the Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554, ATTN: Enforcement Bureau – Telecommunications Consumers Division. The responses must also be e-mailed to EnforcementBureauTCD@fcc.gov. 14. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that copies of this Order shall be sent by e-mail and registered mail, return receipt requested, to the robocall mitigation contact (as certified in the RMD) for each Company listed in Appendix A. 15. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to section 1.102(b) of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR § 1.102(b), this Order SHALL BE EFFECTIVE upon release. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Patrick Webre Chief Enforcement Bureau APPENDIX A RMD File No. Business Name Deficiency Notice Email RMD0007602 makrodepot Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Nov. 17, 2025 12:15 PM EDT) RMD0008963 ConnX Inc. Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Nov. 17, 2025 3:42 PM EDT) RMD0005673 Reachme.com Inc Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Nov. 19, 2025 4:15 PM EDT) RMD0007929 Convergence Technology Solutions COrp. Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Nov. 17, 2025 5:06 PM EDT) RMD0005475 Skycom Healthcare Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Dec. 10, 2025 4:16 PM EDT) RMD0006142 CFX BUSINESS SOLUTIONS INC Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Sept. 15, 2025 5:14 PM EDT) RMD0009206 Daniels Business Services Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Nov. 21, 2025 11:06 AM EDT) RMD0008474 Central Point Networks, LLC. Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Nov. 21, 2025 11:54 AM EDT) RMD0011016 DTA PROFESSIONALS LLC Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Sept. 17, 2025 2:40 PM EDT) RMD0008638 Voko Communications LLC Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Dec. 4, 2025 11:11 AM EDT) RMD0011056 Inn Touch Systems Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Sept. 22, 2025 1:10 PM EDT) RMD0009397 Yeltek Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Jan. 22, 2026 4:29 PM EDT) RMD0006872 HIGHCOMM LLC Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Jan. 28, 2026 6:49 PM EDT) RMD0008713 Inatech Solutions Inc. Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Sept. 24, 2025 3:41 PM EDT) RMD0008142 phonesforward.com Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Jan. 22, 2026 5:10 PM EDT) RMD0008143 Dixie Net Communications Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Sept. 24, 2025 4:19 PM EDT) RMD0011232 Enhanced Business Communications LLC Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Nov. 21, 2025 4:15 PM EDT) RMD0008192 Dynamic Network Support Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Sept. 24, 2025 4:25 PM EDT) RMD0005602 UT&T Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Jan. 20, 2026 5:01 PM EDT) RMD0004752 SECURE UICC Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Nov. 21, 2025 4:30 PM EDT) RMD0012459 Ring2Voice Inc Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Jan 23, 2026 12:57 PM EDT) RMD0011304 One Too Many Ins Agcy Inc. DBA: Search & Save Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Nov. 24, 2025 2:54 PM EDT) RMD0007940 Apps Communications, Inc. Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Sept. 25, 2025 5:11 PM EDT) RMD0007131 Digital Division LLC Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Sept. 25, 2025 5:17 PM EDT) RMD0008994 Axxess Consult Inc Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Jan. 23, 2026 5:41PM EDT) RMD0008919 Consumer Agent Portal, LLC dba TrustedChoice.com Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Sept. 25, 2025 6:34 PM EDT) RMD0008129 Conference America, Inc. Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Jan. 23, 2026 5:53 PM EDT) RMD0008093 Universal E-Business Solutions, LLC Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Jan. 23, 2026 6:32 PM EDT) RMD0006392 Opex Communications Inc. Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Jan. 23, 2026 6:40 PM EDT) RMD0005094 Optus Networks Pty Limited Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Dec. 19, 2025 3:55 PM EDT) RMD0008498 Jeremiah Connelly Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Nov. 19 ,2025 12:26 PM EDT) RMD0007323 CSB Technologies Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Nov. 18, 2025 12:14 PM EDT) RMD0015313 Easy Numbers LLC Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Nov. 18, 2025 12:10 PM EDT) RMD0008338 SECURE Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Nov. 18, 2025 12:00 PM EDT) RMD0002196 Panobit, LLC Email from RMDReinstatementRequest@fcc.gov (Jan. 23, 2025 7:08 PM EDT)