AT&T may not pursue any claims against Goodman Networks for breach of contract, quantum meruit and unjust enrichment pending resolution of Goodman’s Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding, said an order from U.S. District Judge Sean Jordan for Eastern Texas in Sherman that was signed Monday and posted Tuesday (docket 4:22-cv-00914). The case is stayed until further order of the court, it said. Under the bankruptcy code’s automatic stay provision, filing a bankruptcy petition “prevents the commencement or continuation of any litigation against the bankruptcy debtor for claims that arose before the petition was filed,” it said. The automatic stay provision applies to bankruptcy petitions initiated under Chapter 7, “such as the one at issue here,” it said. AT&T’s Oct. 25 complaint alleges it invoiced Goodman $1.22 million for high-speed internet, long distance, local and intrastate calling and other services it provided the telecommunications company under four written contracts in 2009, 2017 and 2020, but hasn’t been paid (see 2210260025). The complaint seeks recovery of the unpaid funds, plus 18% in annual interest.

Plaintiff Israel Mertz and defendant Verizon agree Mertz’s Fair Credit Reporting Act claims against Verizon should be dismissed without prejudice because the claims will proceed to “contractual arbitration,” said their stipulation Tuesday (docket 7:22-cv-10938) in U.S. District Court for Southern New York in White Plains. Mertz alleged inaccurate and misleading information provided by Verizon led to erroneous debt collection actions (see 2212300022). Mertz previously dismissed his FCRA claims against Equifax, but his claims against TransUnion remain pending.

U.S. District Judge John Koeltl for Southern New York in Manhattan gave Amazon until July 14 to respond to the motion from third-party seller Longyan Junkai Information Technology to remand its petition to vacate an arbitration award in Amazon’s favor to New York County Supreme Court, said the judge’s signed memo endorsement Tuesday (docket 1:23-cv-04869). Longyan’s reply is due July 24, it said. Longyan seeks the recovery of $461,000 in sales proceeds that Amazon seized when it deactivated the seller’s online store on allegations it carried counterfeit goods (see 2306270041).

U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero for Southern New York in Manhattan granted the letter motion of counsel for defendants Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman, establishing a July 7 deadline to respond to two motions in limine filed by the plaintiffs (see 2306260042), said his signed order Monday (docket 1:20-cv-08668). The plaintiffs’ reply is due July 14, said Marrero’s order. Wohl and Burkman face a Dec. 11 jury damages trial for their roles in a robocall campaign to suppress Black citizens’ mail-in votes in the run-up to the 2020 election. The plaintiffs' motions seek an order prohibiting the defendants from producing evidence at trial involving two former defendants who previously settled the claims against them, though they agreed to be held liable for damages. The plaintiffs also want to limit testimony at trial about one plaintiff’s 2002 conviction on a nonviolent offense.

U.S. District Judge Mark Cohen for Northern Georgia in Atlanta granted AT&T's and American Express' motions to compel plaintiff Robert Graham’s claims to arbitration and AT&T’s motion to stay his case pending the outcome of that arbitration, said the judge’s signed order Monday (docket 1:22-cv-05155). Graham alleges Amex and AT&T worked in a “contrived manner” to charge him “unauthorized and fraudulent” fees for his phone upgrades (see 2306010014). Cohen’s order said Graham agreed to arbitrate under the “plain terms” of the AT&T and American Express agreements, and the agreements are enforceable under the applicable contract laws of Georgia, Ohio and Utah. The AT&T and American Express arbitration agreements are “valid and enforceable,” it said. Though Graham denies he agreed to arbitrate his AT&T claims, he doesn’t dispute that he signed the carrier’s wireless customer agreement, it said. That agreement “unambiguously covers all aspects of Graham's relationship with AT&T and the agreement to arbitrate all claims thereunder is valid,” it said. In his dispute with American Express, “Graham's assertion that he never agreed to arbitrate his claims nor sign an arbitration agreement is unavailing,” said the judge.

A third-party Amazon seller's petition to vacate a $461,000 arbitration award in Amazon’s favor should be remanded to New York Supreme Court where it originated before Amazon removed it June 9 (see 2306130004), the seller, Longyan Junkai Information Technology, said Monday. It’s undisputed that Amazon deactivated Longyan’s online store and seized the $461,000 in sales proceeds based on allegations that Longyan was selling counterfeit goods, said its remand motion (docket 1:23-cv-04869) in U.S. District Court for Southern New York in Manhattan. The award should be vacated “for completely irrational and manifest disregard of law,” said the remand motion. Amazon “failed its burden to establish” that the Southern District of New York “has subject matter jurisdiction over this case,” it said. A federal court’s subject-matter jurisdiction “can be established through either diversity jurisdiction or federal question jurisdiction,” but Amazon failed to establish either, it said.

DirecTV’s “hollow” antitrust lawsuit against Nexstar and sidecar companies Mission Broadcasting and White Knight Broadcasting should be dismissed for lack of standing, said the broadcasters Monday in a heavily redacted motion to dismiss filed in U.S. District Court in the Southern District of New York (docket 1:23-cv-02221). DirecTV never paid "the purportedly inflated retransmission consent fees,” said the filing. Because the parties never reached agreement on retransmission consent renewals, “it is impossible to know that they actually would have done so, much less what the rate and non-rate terms would have been, whether that rate would have exceeded market benchmarks,” the broadcasters said. DirecTV filed the lawsuit as a retransmission consent negotiating tactic, and also lacks standing because it can’t show that the court can do anything to redress the matter, the broadcasters said. A judgment in the case would only enjoin Nexstar’s relationship with Mission and White Knight, not compel DirecTV to carry them, said the motion. DirecTV therefore hasn't pleaded, and can't plead, "facts demonstrating that success in this lawsuit will redress the harm it alleges,” said the filing. Even if there were collusion between Mission and White Knight, it would be irrelevant because the companies don’t own top-four stations in the same market, the broadcasters said. “A common, industrywide, and FCC-regulated business practice cannot, in and of itself, support an inference of unlawful conspiracy,” the filing said.

The lawyer for Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman, who face a Dec. 11 jury damages trial for their roles in the robocall campaign to suppress Black citizens' mail-in votes in the 2020 election (see 2306180001), wants until July 7 to respond to “the voluminous issues” raised in the plaintiffs’ two Thursday motions in limine, the lawyer, David Schwartz wrote U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero for Southern New York in Manhattan in a letter Friday (docket 1:20-cv-08668). Former co-defendants Message Communications and Robert Mahanian settled all claims against them before Marrero granted summary judgment in the plaintiffs’ favor, and Wohl and Burkman “have signaled that they may try to shift blame from themselves to Message and Mahanian in an attempt to limit their damages,” said one of the plaintiffs’ motions. They seek an order prohibiting Wohl and Burkman from introducing any evidence involving Message and Mahanian at trial. Their other motion seeks to bar the defendants from cross-examining at trial Gene Steinberg, one of eight consumer plaintiffs, about details of his 2002 conviction for a “nonviolent offense.” The fact of Steinberg’s 2002 conviction is important to his case because it shows the 2020 robocall campaign was particularly traumatic for him, and it demonstrates the “insidious nature” of the defendants’ voter suppression operation, said the motion. Though Steinberg isn't Black, the robocall falsely warned recipients not to participate in mail-in voting because doing so would expose them to old arrest warrants or investigations of their criminal records. The details of Steinberg's conviction “are wholly irrelevant, particularly in a trial concerning damages only,” it said.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a 2024 Democratic presidential hopeful, sought support for his battle against social media censorship, in a Saturday tweet, asking followers whether platforms should “censor presidential candidates” after YouTube pulled his June 5 interview with Canadian podcaster Jordan Peterson. Kennedy is suing his rival, President Joe Biden, and numerous federal government agencies and officials for a “censorship campaign” (see related story, this issue). Kennedy's complaint, filed in April with anti-vaccine organization Children's Health Defense, alleges the federal government is responsible for “online suppression of any reporting” suggesting that COVID-19 may have originated in a Chinese government laboratory in Wuhan or “facts and opinions about the COVID vaccines that might lead people to become ‘hesitant’ about COVID vaccine mandates,” says the complaint. Among the topics in the 95-minute interview is a discussion about drug companies and vaccines. Google said the podcast was removed for violating YouTube’s terms of service on vaccine misinformation. “Maybe you can help me figure out what 'misinformation' was in this interview," tweeted the candidate, with the hashtag “letRFKspeak.”

U.S. District Judge Ronnie Abrams for Southern New York in Manhattan denied the motion by former third-party Amazon seller Jiakeshu Technology to remand to state court its petition to vacate an arbitration award in Amazon’s favor (see 2212010065), said her signed memorandum opinion and order Wednesday (docket 1:22-cv-10119). An arbitrator ruled last summer that Amazon could keep $50,000 in Jiakeshu sales proceeds seized after Amazon deactivated the third-party store for paying customers to submit fake positive reviews, in violation of its business service agreement. The court agrees with Amazon that the action falls under the New York Convention, and jurisdiction in the Southern District of New York is “therefore proper,” said Abrams’ order. The Federal Arbitration Act doesn’t “by itself provide a basis for subject matter jurisdiction in federal courts,” it said. Whether an award falls under the New York Convention and is therefore subject to federal jurisdiction is determined by Title 9 Section 202, it said. Jiakeshu argues the New York Convention doesn’t apply because there are no connections to a foreign legal framework, but in light of Jiakeshu’s status as a Hong Kong corporation “whose principal place of business is China,” the court disagrees, said the order. Consistent with Section 202, the 2nd Circuit said “arbitration agreements or awards fall under the New York Convention where one or more of the parties is a foreign citizen.” Abrams ordered the parties by July 5 to propose a briefing schedule on Jiakeshu’s petition to vacate "and any other next steps in this matter."