Another law firm complained it was shortchanged in the June 12 motion from co-lead counsel in the social media multidistrict litigation, asking the court to establish a six-member subcommittee for overseeing and litigating issues in the MDL unique to school districts and other governmental entities (see 2306150030). Frantz Law Group represents nearly 500 school districts, cities and counties in the MDL, 93 of which filed complaints in litigation, principal James Frantz wrote U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers for Northern California in Oakland in a letter Wednesday (docket 4:22-md-03047). “Neither myself, nor any attorney associated with Frantz Law Group were consulted, notified, or contacted prior to the filing of this motion,” even though the firm represents the majority of the governmental entity cases currently filed in the MDL, he said. The firm doesn’t object to creating the subcommittee, but “we respectfully request that the composition of the subcommittee include attorneys from Frantz Law Group, and associated counsel, as we will likely represent the largest group of school districts in this MDL,” Frantz told the judge. “We are prepared to discuss this matter with you or leadership at a convenient date for all parties.” He asked the judge to postpone appointing any members to the subcommittee, “pending further discussions” among the plaintiffs’ counsel. Kessler Topaz, attorneys for the city of Providence, Rhode Island, previously asked the judge to be included on the subcommittee, noting, like Frantz Law Group, they weren’t consulted before the June 12 motion.

Two Maryland school system lawsuits joined the multidistrict litigation against social media platforms, bringing the number of cases in Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation to 107, said conditional transfer order 12 (docket MDL 3047) Tuesday in U.S. District Court for Northern California in Oakland. Board of Education Harford County v. Meta and Board of Education Howard County v. Meta bring to 87 the number of tagalong actions beyond the 20 transferred in October to the California federal court for consolidated pretrial proceedings under U.S. District Court Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. The MDL alleges social media platforms Facebook, Instagram, Snap, TikTok and YouTube are fueling a mental health crisis among minors in the U.S.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is considering scheduling oral argument for October in San Francisco in T-Mobile’s appeal of the district court’s March 31 preliminary injunction denial to block the agency’s USF contribution overhaul from taking effect as it did April 1 (see 2305160003), said a text-only entry Monday (docket 23-15490). U.S. Magistrate Judge Lauren Beeler granted T-Mobile’s unopposed motion last month to stay her review of the overhaul until the 9th Circuit resolves the appeal (see 2305260025).

U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero for Southern New York in Manhattan adjourned to Dec .11 from Aug. 7 the jury trial of Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman for their roles in the robocall campaign to suppress Black citizens' mail-in votes in the 2020 election, said his signed order Friday (docket 1:20-cv-08668). He also adjourned to Dec. 8 from Aug. 4 the final pretrial conference in the case, said his order. The parties, complying with Marrero’s June 12 order (see 2306130032), wrote the judge Friday, expressing their preference for a Dec. 4 trial date, but he picked Dec. 11 instead. The nine “private” plaintiffs, including eight individual citizens, plus the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, “maintain the objections” they previously asserted opposing adjournment of the Aug. 7 trial, on grounds that they “will suffer prejudice from an adjournment,” Rick Sawyer, special counsel to New York Attorney General Letitia James (D), told the judge in the letter. James’ office “takes no position on those objections,” said Sawyer. Marrero previously granted summary judgment against Wohl and Burkman on the robocall allegations (see 2303090003). the jury trial will decide on the scope of relief sought, including damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.

T-Mobile “obviously” is aware of the change in Delaware corporate law that now permits corporations to amend their certificates of incorporation to limit the personal liability of most senior officers for monetary damages if the officers breach their fiduciary duty of care, President-CEO Mike Sievert told T-Mobile’s annual meeting virtually Friday. T-Mobile is “tracking” the change in Delaware corporate law “as a company and as a board," said Sievert in Q&A. “But we have not made any changes to the certificate of incorporation at this time,” he said. “The duty of care is very important and taken very seriously by both our board and our management. If there is an update to our policies, we’ll make sure to disclose that publicly to you.” It was the only shareholder question raised online during Q&A, and it's not known who raised it because neither Sievert nor T-Mobile Chairman Timotheus Hottges, who read the question from a monitor, didn't identify the questioner.

Comcast and MaxLinear propose an expedited schedule to resolve Comcast’s application for a preliminary injunction to bar MaxLinear from walking away from its contractual obligations to supply chips for Comcast’s broadband gateways (see 2305300045), the companies wrote U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein for Southern New York in Manhattan in a joint letter Thursday (docket 1:23-cv-04436). Time is of the essence, because MaxLinear committed to continue supplying the chips for Comcast's broadband gateways, but only through Aug. 16, in return for Comcast's agreement to withdraw its motion for a temporary restraining order. Under the proposed schedule, MaxLinear would file its brief in opposition to the injunction by July 14, said the letter. Comcast’s reply would be due Aug. 9, it said. The companies also want Hellerstein to set a hearing on Comcast’s injunction application by Aug. 16, said the letter.

Terra Towers seeks leave to file its first amended complaint for breach of contract against American Tower International, and for “such other relief” as the court deems “just and proper,” said its motion Wednesday (docket 1:23-cv-20009) in U.S. District Court for Southern Florida in Miami. Terra alleges ATI improperly withdrew from an $800 million Latin American wireless project agreement without justification, and that it backed out of a commitment to buy several Terra subsidiaries for $466 million (see 2212160042). The action also involves the alleged breach of a telecom tower development agreement with a Terra affiliate for 958 cellphone towers in Latin America for $328 million. Since the initiation of the action in December, the parties have engaged in dispositive motion practice, said Terra’s motion. It now seeks leave to “refine” its claim that the parties “entered a binding contract,” it said. The amended complaint “establishes those allegations and supports the requested relief of the claim presented,” it said. ATI denies the parties ever had a binding contract.

Verizon failed to do a reasonable investigation into inaccurate reporting of a former customer’s account status, said a Tuesday lawsuit (docket 2:23-cv-04636) in U.S. District Court for Central California in Los Angeles. The complaint also names Equifax, Experian, Trans Union and Innovis Data Solutions as defendants. Plaintiff Henry Sobol of Santa Clarita, California, canceled his Verizon Wireless account in September in good standing and contacted the carrier to ask it to transfer his numbers to a new carrier, said the complaint. Verizon confirmed by email that the numbers were successfully transferred and his service would end Sept. 7, it said. Verizon’s billing cycle for Sobol began on the eighth of every month under its automatic payment system. On Sept. 28, Sobol received an email saying he would be reimbursed $15.02 for the unused pro rata portion of the September bill, and his October statement showed a zero balance, the complaint said. In January, third-party debt collector IC System informed Sobol he owed an unpaid balance of $125.42 to Verizon, a charge he disputed. Despite several attempts to dispute the validity of the debt, Verizon “persists in claiming the debt as valid and reporting this debt,” the complaint said. Verizon should have discovered from its records that the reported amount was inaccurate, and it failed to relay all relevant information in Sobol’s dispute to the credit bureaus, which also were required to do their own reasonable reinvestigations into Sobol’s account, plaintiff said. Though Trans Union acknowledged the debt was invalid in February, a month later it changed the status of Sobol’s Verizon account to show it in collections. Verizon “submits inaccurate credit information” about Sobol’s account to the four credit bureaus every 30 days, says the suit. Sobol charges Verizon with violation of the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the California Credit Reporting Agencies Act and all defendants with violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Sobol seeks an award of actual, punitive and statutory damages, plus attorneys’ costs and legal fees.

U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero for Southern New York in Manhattan signed an order Wednesday reaffirming the pretrial briefing schedule he ordered May 2 in the case against defendants Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman for their roles in the robocall campaign to suppress Black citizens' mail-in votes in the 2020 election. Marrero’s order Wednesday heeded the pleas of New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) and the other plaintiffs not to adjourn the pretrial filing deadlines because doing so would give the defendants an unfair advantage, even as the judge reversed his decision not to delay the Aug. 7 jury trial until the fall (see 2306130032). Under the briefing schedule, Thursday was the deadline for the parties to file a joint pretrial order, pretrial memorandum, joint proposed voir dire questions, joint proposed requests to charge and a joint witness list. The schedule culminates in an Aug. 4 pretrial conference. Marrero previously granted summary judgment against Wohl and Burkman on the robocall allegations (see 2303090003). A jury will decide on the scope of relief sought, including damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.

Voyager Labs seeks a discovery stay pending the court’s resolution of its motion to dismiss Meta’s data-scraping complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted (see 2304140003), said its motion Tuesday (docket 3:23-cv-00154) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Francisco. Without the requested stay, Voyager’s responses to Meta’s first discovery requests would be June 21, said the motion. That’s before any yet-to-be-scheduled case management conference, it said. It also predates the court’s July 27 hearing on Voyager’s pending, “case-dispositive” motion to dismiss, it said. It would be “unfairly prejudicial and inefficient” to require Voyager to engage in discovery before the court has held a case management conference or had the opportunity to consider the “case-dispositive arguments” in Voyager’s motion to dismiss, it said.