CTIA, the Ohio Telecom Association, USTelecom, NCTA, the Wireless ISP Association and other ISP groups asked the 6th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court to stay the FCC’s net neutrality order (see 2406100044). The FCC wants to move the case to the D.C. Circuit and has declined to stay the order, which takes effect July 22. The agency “has asserted total authority over how Americans access the Internet,” according to a joint motion filed Monday (docket 24-3450). “That is not hyperbole,” the groups said. The order “is only the latest jolt in a decade of regulatory whiplash for ISPs,” the associations said. After nearly 20 years of a light-touch approach to regulating the internet, in 2015 the FCC asserted for the first time authority over high-speed internet access service under Title II of the Communications Act, the filing said: Before the U.S. Supreme Court “could weigh in, a new Administration reverted to the traditional light-touch approach. Now, after another change in Administration, the Commission is back to a heavy hand, promising to make even more aggressive use of its claimed powers.” The court should stay “the latest flip-flop pending judicial review” since “petitioners are overwhelmingly likely to succeed on the merits,” the ISPs said. They argue that the order should be rejected under the Supreme Court’s evolving major questions doctrine. “Because the Commission cannot point to clear congressional authorization for applying common-carrier regulation to the Internet, the Order is unlawful,” they said.
Frontier customers are at a “significant risk of identity theft” and other financial harm as a result of an April 13 data breach of the telecom company’s computer systems, alleged a negligence class action Monday (docket 3:24-cv-01418) in U.S. District Court for Northern Texas in Dallas.
The FCC’s Oct. 25 declaratory ruling authorizing E-rate funding for Wi-Fi on school buses (see 2312200040) “is both appropriate and lawful,” the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers and eight other educational groups said in a 5th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court amicus brief Monday (docket 23-60641) in support of the commission's ruling.
The League of Women Voters amended its April 26 motion for a preliminary injunction (see 2404290016) to enjoin an additional defendant, Voice Broadcasting, from producing or distributing AI-generated robocalls impersonating any person, without that person’s express, prior written consent, said its amended motion Friday (docket 1:24-cv-00073) in U.S. District Court for New Hampshire in Concord. The league alleges that Voice Broadcasting conspired with three other defendants -- political consultant Steve Kramer, broadband provider Lingo Telecom and robocall broadcaster Life Corp. -- to send “thousands of robocalls” two days before the Jan. 23 New Hampshire primary to people they thought were likely Democratic voters, featuring deepfake simulations of President Joe Biden's voice (see 2403150034). The league alleges the robocalls “coercively” and incorrectly stated that by participating in the New Hampshire primary, Democratic voters would lose their vote in the November general election. Voice Broadcasting purchases communications services from its affiliate Life Corp. to enable calling capabilities on the Voice Broadcasting platform, said the league’s amended motion. The FCC previously cited Life Corp. for failing to comply with federal laws and regulations governing the dissemination of robocalls, “including delivering unsolicited calls to residential phone lines, and failing to disclose required information in its prerecorded messages and telephone solicitations,” it said.
The U.S. Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit granted the FCC’s motion to dismiss the petition of Essential Network Technologies and MetComm.Net that challenged the authority of the agency and the Universal Service Administrative Co. to withhold reimbursement of discounts for IT and broadband services that the two companies provided to schools under Section 254 of the Communications Act (see 2404250028). Circuit Judges Robert Wilkins, Michelle Childs and Florence Pan issued a per curiam order Friday (docket 24-1027). The petitioners didn’t challenge the FCC's “final reviewable order,” the order said. The D.C. Circuit also denied the petitioners’ request for mandamus relief to order USAC to release the reimbursements, said the order. USAC’s investigations of the two petitioners and their eligibility to receive universal service fund reimbursements are complete, the FCC told the D.C. Circuit last week (see 2406050001). USAC’s delay in completing the investigations wasn’t so egregious as to warrant mandamus, the order said. The petitioners haven’t otherwise demonstrated a “clear and indisputable right to mandamus relief,” it added.
Financier BIU, which unsuccessfully petitioned the FCC to reinstate a Spectrum Five complaint against Intelsat, is appealing the agency's dismissal of that petition. The full commission's April dismissal of a petition seeking reinstatement of the SF complaint (see 2404110053) was fraudulent because it was done at the instruction of someone who had no right, power or authority to do so, BIU said Friday in a petition for review (docket 24-1189) at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The D.C. Circuit complaint seeks reinstatement of SF's petition that the FCC act against Intelsat for allegedly interfering with SF's spectrum license. "The unauthorized withdrawal of the [SF] Petition amounts to a fraud on the Commission itself," BIU said. The SF petition was withdrawn at the instigation of SF CEO David Wilson, who lacked authority to do so, BIU argued. Wilson didn't comment Monday.
Communications Litigation Today is tracking the below lawsuits involving appeals of FCC actions. Cases marked with an * were terminated since the last update. Cases in bold are new since the last update.
The FCC urged the 6th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court Friday to move the challenge to the FCC’s net neutrality order to the D.C. Circuit (docket 24-3450). The FCC also issued an order declining to stay the rules, which take effect July 22, pending judicial review.
FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel announces retirements of Mark Nadel, attorney-adviser, Wireline Bureau, and Diane Burstein, deputy chief, Consumer and Government Affairs Bureau … NAB announces election results, including newly elected to radio board: Collin Jones, Cumulus Media executive vice president-corporate strategy and development/Westwood One president, chair; Kevin Perry, Perry Publishing and Broadcasting president-CEO, first vice chair; and Leonard Wheeler, Mel Wheeler president, second vice chair; to television board: Lynn Beall, Tegna executive vice president-chief operating officer, media operations, first vice chair; Sinclair Broadcast Group CEO Chris Ripley, second vice chair; RaMona Alexander, American Spirit Media vice president-general manager, WDBD and corporate programming, third vice chair.; and to designated TV network seat on executive committee: Keith Murphy, Paramount senior vice president-regulatory counsel; NAB also appoints Pilar Ramos, TelevisaUnivision executive vice president-general counsel-corporate secretary, to fill vacancy on TelevisaUnivision’s television board.
The Universal Service Administrative Co.'s investigations of Essential Network Technologies and MetComm.Net and their eligibility to receive universal service fund reimbursements are "now complete," FCC counsel James Carr wrote the U.S. Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit Tuesday (docket 24-1027). USAC has begun to notify the companies and the schools they serve “of any downward adjustments in universal service funding stemming from USAC’s findings in the investigations,” said Carr. USAC expects to complete this notification process within the next month, he said. The two companies petitioned the D.C. Circuit in February to order USAC to release the reimbursements they said they were due for IT and broadband services that they provided to schools under Section 254 of the Communications Act (see 2402200044). The FCC said in late April that USAC’s investigations stemmed from evidence that the companies and the schools they served “may have had a prohibited pre-existing relationship” before the schools awarded the companies their business (see 2404250028). Carr’s letter to the D.C. Circuit didn’t delve into USAC’s findings from those investigations.