AT&T moved Tuesday for an entry of default judgment in its breach of contract complaint against defendant Goodman Networks for failure to plead or otherwise defend the lawsuit, said its motion (docket 4:22-cv-00914) in U.S. District Court for Eastern Texas in Sherman. It asks for an award of $1.44 million, including attorneys’ fees and other court costs, said the motion. AT&T alleges Goodman, a telecommunication services provider, owes it more than $1.22 million in unpaid fees for enterprise internet services it rendered Goodman under an April 2009 master services agreement and a July 2017 business services agreement. U.S. District Judge Sean Jordan signed an order March 13 giving AT&T 21 days to file a motion for default judgment against Goodman, or it would risk dismissal of the case “for want of prosecution” (see 2303150004). AT&T took eight days to comply.

SES' appeal of a bankruptcy court denying its C-Band Alliance claims against Intelsat is being referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge Mark Colombell for a settlement conference, per an order Wednesday (docket 3:22-cv-00668) in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. U.S. District Judge Robert Payne pushed settlement talks at the conclusion Monday of oral argument in the case (see 2303200024)

NetChoice announced the creation of an “official litigation center” to defend “free expression and free enterprise” in court against government overreach. The center “will be the go-to source for the future of American tech litigation, to ensure the internet remains safe and free as it ages,” said Director Chris Marchese Tuesday. NetChoice named Nicole Saad Bembridge associate director. NetChoice Vice President Carl Szabo will also help lead the litigation center. NetChoice has mounted legal efforts against various state laws on privacy and Communications Decency Act Section 230 (see 2303060047, 2302140081 and 2301030062).

Robert Graham, who alleges AT&T’s handset upgrade exchange program was a “bait-and-switch scheme,” had “no contract” with AT&T, and so “no reason” exists to compel his dispute to arbitration, said Graham’s opposition Thursday (docket 1:22-cv-05155) in U.S. District Court for Northern Georgia in Atlanta to AT&T’s motion to stay his case pending the outcome of that arbitration (see 2303130002). Graham alleges AT&T “falsely and deceptively” sends customers new phone upgrades on new lines they didn’t order, but AT&T asserts he agreed to a “broad arbitration provision” when he renewed his contract with AT&T in October 2018 to upgrade his phone. Even if an arbitration provision were to exist, Graham’s claim about AT&T’s fraudulent activity “clearly falls outside the conscionable scope of an arbitration clause for telephone services and equipment provided,” said Graham’s opposition. If the issue “of the making of the arbitration agreement or the failure to perform it is raised,” either party “may demand a jury trial of that issue,” it said. “These are questions of fact for a jury to resolve,” and accordingly AT&T’s motion to stay should be denied, it said.

DirecTV is third on the list of creditors with unsecured claims against regional sports network Diamond Sports Group, with a customer claim of $40.1 million, said Diamond's Chapter 11 petition Tuesday (docket 4:23-bk-90116) in U.S. Bankruptcy Court for Southern Texas in Houston. The Sinclair subsidiary, which owns about 30 RSNs, owes $1.8 billion to U.S. Bank and $77.2 million to Dolan Broadcast Properties for a contract obligation, said the petition. Additional creditors include the Arizona Diamondbacks ($30.9 million owed), Intelsat ($15 million), Raycom Sports Network ($8.5 million), marketing firms Home Team Sports ($5.1 million) and Harte-Hanks Response Management ($247,904), digital payment platform Evergent ($170,000), Amazon Web Services ($24,000) and AT&T ($22,374), it said.

U.S. District Judge Sean Jordan for Eastern Texas in Sherman signed an order Monday (docket 4:22-cv-00914) directing plaintiff AT&T to file a motion for default judgment against defendant Goodman Networks within 21 days. AT&T’s failure to do so will “risk dismissal for want of prosecution,” said the judge. AT&T’s Oct. 25 complaint for breach of contract and unjust enrichment alleges Goodman, a telecommunication services provider, owes the carrier more than $1.22 million for enterprise internet services rendered under an April 2009 master services agreement and a July 2017 business services agreement. AT&T filed a request Dec. 20 for an entry of default against Goodman for its failure to timely respond to the complaint. The court granted the request the same day, but AT&T never filed a motion for default judgment, said the judge’s order.

Chief U.S. District Judge Beth Phillips for Western Missouri in Kansas City signed an order Friday directing plaintiff Helen Pollak and defendants Verizon and Experian to file either “dismissal paperwork” or a joint status report by May 9 on the settlement of Pollak’s claims that the companies violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act, said a text-only entry (docket 4:22-cv-00637). The parties will file a joint stipulation of dismissal when the settlement agreement they reached in principle is final, they told the court Wednesday (see 2303090012). Pollak alleged Experian refused to remove a fraudulent Verizon account from her credit profile.

YouTuber Marshall Daniels owes YouTube parent company Alphabet $38,576 in legal fees for his "frivolous" litigation against the streaming service, ruled U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia DeMarchi for the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California last week (docket 5:20-cv-04687). Daniels sued YouTube in 2020, claiming videos on the pandemic and George Floyd were taken down at the behest of members of Congress. After his complaint and an amended complaint were dismissed, Alphabet sought legal fees. Daniels "articulated no plausible legal theory -- novel or otherwise -- for holding private entities liable as government actors in the circumstances presented," DeMarchi said . Alphabet is entitled to an award of attorneys' fees since the claim "clearly lacked merit and was frivolous from the outset," the judge said.

Plaintiff Helen Pollak and defendants Verizon and Experion reached an agreement in principle “on all material terms required” to settle Pollak’s Fair Credit Reporting Act claims that Experian refused to remove a fraudulent Verizon account from her credit profile (see 2212290001) pending in this action, said her notice Wednesday (docket 4:22-cv-00637) in U.S. District Court for Western Missouri in Kansas City. The parties will file a joint stipulation of dismissal with the court when the settlement agreement is final, it said. Pollak’s complaint alleged it was “profoundly unfair” Verizon can verify false information, in violation of the FCRA, and that Experian “continues to let them do it.” Both companies previously denied culpability.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals scheduled a March 28 mediation virtual conference at 10 a.m. EDT in the three associated cases (dockets 23-1142, 23-1145 and 23-1146) in which Altice is appealing a lower court’s denial of its motions to compel arbitration and to stay the litigation pending the outcome of those arbitrations, said a notice Tuesday from the circuit mediator. The plaintiffs in all three actions in U.S. District Court for Southern West Virginia in Charleston alleged Altice USA’s Suddenlink broadband and pay-TV offering failed to provide “safe, adequate and reliable service to its West Virginia subscribers” (see 2302090037). They also alleged Suddenlink intentionally reduced its maintenance work, downsized its full-time workforce and ignored the thousands of customer complaints that resulted. When Suddenlink -- rebranded Optimum in August -- tried to compel its customers’ disputes to arbitration, the lower court ruled the arbitration agreements the customers consented to were unconscionable and unenforceable, partly because Suddenlink revised its terms of service at least five times between September 2019 and October 2021, plus twice more during the litigation.