The Schools, Health and Libraries Broadband Coalition, an intervenor on the FCC’s behalf in opposing the petition for review brought by Maurine and Matt Molak to block the use of E-rate funds for Wi-Fi on school buses (see 2401250002), supports the FCC’s motion to dismiss the Molaks’ case for lack of jurisdiction (see 2402070002), the coalition wrote the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a letter Wednesday (docket 23-60641). The Molaks weren't part of the proceedings before the FCC to use E-rate funds for school bus Wi-Fi, and the commission argued that participation was “a condition precedent” to judicial review under the Communications Act, plus “a jurisdictional requirement” under the Hobbs Act.

In light of the FCC’s notice Wednesday to the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation that 10 petitions for review are pending in six appellate courts, all challenging the commission’s Nov. 20 digital divide order (see 2402070058), the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hold the two petitions under its watch in abeyance, said its two separate orders Thursday. The petitions are from the Minnesota Telecom Alliance (docket 24-1179) and the Missouri Internet & Television Association (docket 24-1183). The cases will be held in abeyance pending further order from the panel, said the orders.

LTD Broadband asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to review the FCC’s rejection of its long-form application for Rural Digital Opportunity Fund support, as expected (see 2311160039). LTD challenged the FCC’s Dec. 4 order denying LTD’s application for review of the Wireline Bureau’s decision to reject the company’s application. “LTD asks that the Court hold the Order unlawful and set it aside,” said the company’s petition, which was posted by the court Wednesday. The FCC didn't immediately comment.

The FCC filed notice with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation Wednesday of 10 multicircuit petitions for review challenging the commission’s Nov. 20 digital divide order and the “digital discrimination of access” definition contained in that order (see 2401310003). The petitions were filed in the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 11th and the D.C. Circuits and were received by the FCC from the petitioners within 10 days after the order’s Jan. 22 publication in the Federal Register, said the notice. All were filed between Jan. 30 and Feb. 1, said the notice. Under Panel Rule 25.3, the FCC is serving the notice on the clerks of all the circuit courts where petitions for review have been filed, plus on counsel for all parties, it said. Virtually all the petitioners are challenging the order on grounds that it gives the commission unprecedented authority to regulate the broadband internet economy.

The opening brief of the Insurance Marketing Coalition is due March 18 in its petition for review of the FCC’s Dec. 18 order implementing rules under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act to target and eliminate illegal robotexts (see 2312220059), said a briefing notice Monday (docket 23-14125) at the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The coalition contends the order exceeds the FCC’s statutory authority and was adopted “without observance of procedure required by law.” The coalition wants the 11th Circuit to vacate the order, which imposes several measures, including codifying that the national do not call registry’s protections apply to unlawful text messages.

The Texas Cable Association wants the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to hold the FCC’s Nov. 20 digital discrimination order unlawful and to set it aside, said its petition for review (docket 24-60048), filed Tuesday and posted Thursday. It shares the docket number with the petition that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce also filed Tuesday along with the Texas Association of Business and the Longview, Texas, Chamber of Commerce (see 2401300053).

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals tentatively set oral argument for the week of May 13 in Gray Television’s petition for review against the FCC, said the court’s notice Monday (docket 22-14274). Gray’s petition argues that the FCC’s authority over broadcast license transfers doesn’t apply to Gray’s 2020 purchase of another broadcaster’s CBS network affiliation in Anchorage because no licenses were transferred (see 2309140058). The case will be argued in Birmingham, Alabama.

With the FCC’s Nov. 20 order adopting a definition of “digital discrimination of access” to broadband internet service published Jan. 22 in the Federal Register, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Texas Association of Business and the Longview, Texas, Chamber of Commerce filed a petition for review Tuesday at the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals seeking to have the order vacated. Tuesday’s petition differs little from the "protective" petition the groups filed Jan. 19 “out of an abundance of caution” in case the 5th Circuit determined that the date of public notice was the date of public release rather than the date of FR publication (see 2401230004). The U.S. Chamber “supports expanded access of fast, affordable, and reliable internet,” that “private sector innovation” drives, Neil Bradley, executive vice president-chief policy officer and head-strategic advocacy, said in a statement Tuesday. The FCC's new rule “will hinder efforts to bridge the digital divide -- hurting the very people it aims to help,” Bradley argued. It empowers the FCC to “micromanage the internet” and “subverts” the badly needed broadband investments included in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, he said.

Ligado's takings complaint against the federal government (see 2310130003) mistakenly treats its L-band license as company property, contrary to legal precedent, DOJ said in a motion to dismiss last week (docket 23-1797). Moreover, DOJ said Ligado's complaint before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, asserting the government is unlawfully trying to preclude the company from using its FCC-granted L-band license, doesn't allege authorized government action that could give rise to takings liability. In addition, DOJ said the federal claims court lacks jurisdiction and Ligado hasn't identified authorized government action precluding the company from actually using its modified license. Ligado can't plead the license lost all value, as it still authorizes mobile satellite service use. Moreover, the company can't claim any economic loss is permanent, said the motion. Ligado emailed Friday that as it set out in its lawsuit, "government officials deliberately deprived [it] of its rightfully licensed property, and the government must be held accountable. This attack on an American business by the world’s most powerful institution is contrary to the rule of law and antithetical to the government’s years-long support for the deployment of 5G technology as a vital national priority. We worked diligently and in good faith with government agencies to find a fair resolution but were left with no choice but to pursue litigation to defend our interests."

The 11th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court “may lack jurisdiction” over the Insurance Marketing Coalition’s petition for review to vacate the FCC’s Dec. 18 order imposing several measures under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act to restrict unlawful text messaging, said the court’s notice Thursday (docket 23-14125). “If it is determined that this court is without jurisdiction, this appeal will be dismissed,” said the notice. IMC filed the appeal before the order at issue was published in the Federal Register, it said. It asked the parties “to simultaneously advise the court in writing” within 14 days of their position regarding the jurisdictional questions. The FCC has asked the 11th Circuit to dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction (see 2401190057), and IMC said it takes no position on the FCC’s request (see 2401250033).