Smartbiz Telecom withdrew its Feb. 3 motion to stay discovery in Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody’s (R) robocall complaint (see 2212060034), said Smartbiz’s notice Tuesday (docket 1:22-cv-23945) in U.S. District Court for Southern Florida in Miami. The parties “are currently engaging in discovery,” said the notice. Smartbiz moved for the stay on grounds that Moody’s discovery requests were “very broad,” and encompassed “the entirety” of all Smartbiz business activities for the past four years. Moody’s Dec. 5 complaint alleged Smartbiz is “one of the most prolific transmitters of illegal robocalls” in the U.S. She alleged the VoIP company violated the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act and other statutes, plus the FTC's Telemarketing Sales Rule.

U.S. District Judge Nicholas Ranjan for Western Pennsylvania in Pittsburgh signed an order Wednesday staying the defendants’ deadline to answer or otherwise respond to Pennsylvania’s Nov. 2 robocalling complaint “while the parties pursue settlement discussions,” said a text-only entry (docket 2:22-cv-01551). The stay will remain in effect until further order of the court, it said. Ranjan ordered the parties to file a joint status report by May 8 updating the court on the status of the settlement talks. The report should address whether a settlement agreement has been reached, “and, if not, whether the parties have a mutual interest in engaging in private mediation,” said the order. The complaint, filed by then-Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro (D), alleged that five telemarketing entities operating out of the same lower Manhattan address are responsible for causing hundreds of thousands of unwanted robocalls to be placed to Pennsylvania consumers (see 2211030056). The complaint alleges violations of the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule, plus state and federal unfair competition laws, but not the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, because the five entities are not alleged to have placed the calls themselves. The defendants, through unopposed motions, were granted five deadline extensions before Wednesday's stay to respond to the complaint, most recently on March 14. Shapiro was sworn in Jan. 17 as Pennsylvania’s 48th governor. Michelle Henry (D) is his AG successor.

A federal court delayed a motion hearing by one week in T-Mobile’s challenge of California USF contribution changes (see 2303100046 and 2302280037). The previously scheduled Thursday virtual hearing will now be March 23, the U.S. District Court in Northern California said in a Monday text entry in case 3:23-cv-00483 (Pacer). In a separate case about a California social media law (see 2303130003), the same court on Friday granted California's motion to postpone a June 22 hearing on NetChoice's preliminary injunction motion until July 27 at 1:30 p.m. PDT. That hearing will be in-person only, the court said.

The former interim director of the 911 center in Washington, D.C., filed a whistleblower complaint against District Mayor Muriel Bowser (D), the Office of Unified Communications (OUC) and the D.C. Fire and Emergency Medical Services (FEMS) Department. The D.C. Superior Court set a virtual initial scheduling conference for June 2 at 9:30 a.m. EDT (case 2023-CAB-001335). Cleo Subido alleged the District “retaliated against her after she disclosed irregularities, violations of laws and regulations, gross mismanagement, waste, fraud, and abuse, and threats to the health and safety of the public concerning the manner in which [OUC] operated.” After repeated 911 failures by OUC, Subido made changes to bring the office in compliance with national standards, cooperated with a D.C. audit, responded to FOIA requests, “truthfully” responded to media queries and “brought to the attention of her staff and superiors … deep and at times fatal flaws in OUC’s operations.” In response, Bowser “scuttled Ms. Subido’s anticipated promotion to OUC’s permanent Director, and instead demoted her,” Subido claimed. In November, Bowser “inexplicably placed Ms. Subido on administrative leave.” In January, after Subido raised legal concerns, defendants terminated her employment, she said. “Defendants’ actions were intended to silence Ms. Subido and deter others from raising and/or addressing similar concerns.” Subido seeks relief including “reinstatement to the position she would have held” without the retaliation, “recovery of all lost wages, salary, and employment benefits,” interest, damages, injunctive relief and attorney fees, she said. The D.C. Council is scheduled to consider the nomination of OUC acting Director Heather McGaffin, named in the complaint, at a roundtable March 15 (see 2302240061). OUC has been criticized about recent audits finding problems at the 911 office and specific incidents where incorrect addresses and miscommunication led to dispatching delays (see 2212060042, 2211100036 and 2209090049). OUC declined to comment Wednesday. Bowser and FEMS didn’t comment.

U.S. District Judge George Hanks for Southern Texas in Houston signed an order Monday (docket 4:20-cv-02021) entering a $122.34 million monetary judgment against defendant Jakob Mears, resolving allegations against him in the eight-state complaint that he helped initiate millions of robocalls to consumers in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The judgment is suspended for Mears’ inability to pay but orders him to forfeit $10,000 in civil penalties by March 31, of which $1,000 will be due in 14 days. The penalties are less harsh than those doled out against another defendant, John Spiller, who was ordered in a Feb. 10 stipulation to pay the states $50,000 in civil penalties within 12 months, including $10,000 due within 30 days (see 2302130010). Mears “neither admits nor denies” any of the allegations, and “only for purposes of resolving this action” does he admit facts “necessary to establish jurisdiction,” said the order.

Plaintiff Spectrum Pacific West, a Charter subsidiary, agreed with defendant Yuma, Arizona, to a dismissal of Charter’s claims with prejudice, said their joint stipulation Monday (docket 2:20-cv-01204) in U.S. District Court for Arizona in Phoenix. Charter sued Yuma in June 2020 over the city's alleged refusal to comply with Arizona's universal video franchising law. Yuma’s counterclaims asserted Charter’s lawsuit breached the indefeasible right of use agreement that Time Warner Cable, Charter's predecessor company, signed with the city over use of Charter’s fiber capacity. The parties only days earlier appeared sharply divided in their dispute, having failed even to agree on the “substance and content” of their joint status report (see 2303060038).

California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) joined 45 other states Sunday, filing an amicus brief supporting Tennessee’s motion for a court order requiring TikTok to produce subpoenaed materials and evidence as part of nationwide investigations into its role in a growing youth mental health crisis. The petition alleges the company has failed to preserve potentially relevant evidence, including internal employee chat messages, and is hampering the investigation of Tennessee, California and other states. “We know that social media is taking a devastating toll on young people’s mental health and well-being, and through our investigation we are getting a clearer sense of TikTok’s role,” said Bonta. The states “have good reason to believe that TikTok’s unfair and deceptive conduct has fueled an ongoing crisis in the mental health of children and teens,” said the brief. TikTok “failed to respond adequately” to the states’ requests for information as part of the multistate investigation, “withholding and obscuring information” that’s critical to their understanding of the conduct at issue and impeding their ability to protect their citizens, it said.

Plaintiff Maria Fernanda Soto Leigue and defendant Keiser University now agree that the plaintiff’s entire Florida Telephone Solicitation Act case should be remanded to the 11th Judicial Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Florida, said their expedited joint motion to remand Wednesday (docket 1:22-cv-22307) in U.S. District Court for Southern Florida in Miami. The parties were split as recently as Tuesday over whether some of the plaintiff's FTSA claims should be severed and remanded to state court, while her other claims would remain in Miami federal court (see 2303010002).

Debt collection agency Halsted Financial Services violated the Texas Business & Commercial Code when it made at least 454 telephone solicitations the past two years to Sage Telecom’s low-income voice customers without first procuring a registration certificate with the state as the statute requires, alleged Sage in a Feb. 1 state court complaint that Halstead removed Wednesday to U.S. District Court for Northern Texas in Dallas (docket 3:23-cv-00463). The Texas code enables plaintiffs to seek damages of $5,000 for each “knowing” violation, said Sage, which has a similar complaint pending against another debt collector, Mercantile Adjustment Bureau, alleging 187 violations of the Texas code (see 2212080043).

However “well-intentioned” it was for protecting children online, California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (AADC) violates the First Amendment by “impermissibly interfering with editorial discretion” and “chilling speech,” said Chamber of Progress, IP Justice and LGBT Tech Institute in an amicus brief Wednesday (docket 5:22-cv-08861) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Jose. The groups support NetChoice’s motion for a preliminary injunction (see 2212140063) “to prevent the destruction of vibrant and diverse speech communities that would follow if the AADC (AB-2273) is enforced in accordance with its terms” if the age-appropriate social media design statute takes effect as scheduled in July 2024, said their brief. The nonprofits “encourage service providers to implement features that help keep kids safe online,” they said. But the AADC “imperils healthy and safe online communities by restricting and penalizing online providers’ exercise of their First Amendment rights to moderate content on their platforms,” they said. Laws like the AADC that seek to regulate online content moderation “are concerning to amici because the parties that amici advise share the core principle of promoting healthy online communities, which require content moderation,” said their brief. The groups oppose the AADC’s requirement that online services, “subject to prior restraint and under pain of financial penalties, vet staggering quantities of content according to vague and overbroad criteria to try to make decisions best left to parents or guardians regarding minors’ online experiences,” they said.