Ligado will oppose Iridium's request to intervene in its L-band litigation against the U.S., the company said in an email to us. Iridium and aviation interests filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Federal Claims last week joining the U.S. in opposing the suit (see 2402120009). Ligado said Iridium is a competitor, and DOD -- also a defendant in Ligado's suit -- is one of its largest sources of revenue. "Iridium is using its proposed participation to support a primary customer, shield itself from discovery, and benefit from the government’s taking of our property," Ligado said. "Contrary to the amicus curiae parties’ assertions, the bipartisan FCC unanimously authorized Ligado to operate terrestrial 5G services within our licensed spectrum after a rigorous, multiyear process," it said. "That April 2020 decision is final."

Ligado's federal complaint about its planned L-band use is against the U.S., Commerce, DOD and NTIA (see 2402120009).

Ligado's federal complaint about its planned L-band use "rests in critical parts on a skewed, misleading narrative," satellite and aviation interests told the U.S. Court of Federal Claims Friday in an amicus brief (docket 1:23-cv-1797) backing the government's motion to dismiss Ligado's suit against the U.S., DOD, Commerce and NTIA (see 2401260003). Iridium, Aireon, the Air Line Pilots Association, Airlines for America and the International Air Transport Association said that their concerns about interference from Ligado's plans for a terrestrial L-band network "should inform the Court’s consideration." The concerns about "harmful interference arising from Ligado’s planned terrestrial operations are real and ongoing, not pretextual or resolved," they said. The brief said the U.S. argument that Ligado doesn't have a property interest in its L-band license, and thus the Constitution's takings clause isn't implicated, "is underscored by the fact that Ligado’s license remains subject to substantial contingencies," including ones stemming from multiple reconsideration petitions before the FCC and from the possibility of judicial review if the agency denies the petitions.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals released from its mediation program Ford’s appeal of the district court’s Nov. 7 denial of its motion to compel the 3G telematics claims of four class-action plaintiffs to arbitration (see 2312230002), said a text-only docket entry Wednesday (docket 23-3966). Ford’s appellant opening brief in the appeal is now due March 18, and the plaintiffs’ appellee brief is due April 17, said the notice. The plaintiffs allege the 3G modems on Ford vehicles they bought or leased were rendered inoperable, as were the roadside assistance features that depended on those modems, after AT&T’s 3G phaseout in 2022. Ford moved to compel their claims to arbitration based on the sales contracts or lease agreements the four plaintiffs had signed, plus the “connected services” agreements three of the plaintiffs signed to operate their FordPass and Lincoln Way apps. But the U.S. District Court for Southern California sided with the plaintiffs, who argued that Ford can’t enforce those agreements, or that they don’t provide for mandatory arbitration.

U.S. District Judge James Cain for Western Louisiana in Lake Charles signed a judgment Thursday (docket 2:21-cv-00923) dismissing with prejudice under Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure all the Walker family’s RF radiation claims against AT&T, Cricket, Microsoft, Motorola, ZTE, plus CTIA and the Telecommunications Industry Association. Each party will bear its own costs, said the judgment. Frank Walker's widow and two sons recently threw in the towel on their April 2021 allegations that defective phones led to his death from brain cancer in 2020 (see 2312260004).

Pastor Frank Walker's surviving wife and two sons, who alleged that defective phones led to his death from brain cancer in 2020 (see 2210180078), are seeking the dismissal with prejudice, under Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, of all claims against AT&T, Cricket, HMD, Microsoft, Motorola and ZTE, plus CTIA and the Telecommunications Industry Association, according to their motion Friday (docket 2:21-cv-00923) in U.S. District Court for Western Louisiana in Lake Charles. Each party will bear its fees and costs, the motion said. The Walkers’ counsel, Hunter Lundy, of Lundy LLP, signed it. Their listed co-counsel is Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of Los Angeles. The Walkers' case was dealt a significant blow April 21 when the court dismissed, on federal preemption grounds, all their claims that the cellphone industry covered up information showing that many cellphones didn't comply with the FCC’s specific absorption rate limitations for how much RF radiation can be absorbed into the human body (see 2304230001).

The 9th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court scheduled a dial-in telephone mediation conference for Jan. 24 at 10 a.m. PST in Ford’s appeal of the district court’s Nov. 7 denial of its motion to compel the 3G telematics claims of four class-action plaintiffs to arbitration (see 2312070004), said a circuit mediator’s order Friday (docket 23-3966). The 9th Circuit’s previously set briefing schedule is amended, with Ford’s opening brief now due Feb. 15, and the appellees' answering brief now due March 18, said the order. Ford’s optional reply brief is due within 21 days from the service date of the answering brief, it said. The plaintiffs allege that the 3G modems on Ford vehicles they bought or leased were rendered inoperable, as were the roadside assistance features that depended on those modems, after AT&T’s 3G phaseout in 2022. Ford moved to compel their claims to arbitration based on the sales contracts or lease agreements the four plaintiffs had signed, plus the “connected services” agreements three of the plaintiffs signed to operate their FordPass and Lincoln Way apps. But the U.S. District Court for Southern California sided with the plaintiffs, who argued that Ford can’t enforce those agreements, or that they don’t provide for mandatory arbitration.

Ford’s mediation questionnaire is due Monday at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in its appeal of the district court’s Nov. 7 denial of its motion to compel the 3G telematics claims of four class-action plaintiffs to arbitration (see 2312040038), said a time schedule order Wednesday (docket 23-3966). Ford’s opening brief in the appeal is due Jan. 15 and the plaintiffs’ answering brief is due Feb. 14, said the order. The plaintiffs allege the 3G modems on Ford vehicles they bought or leased were rendered inoperable, as were the roadside assistance features that depended on those modems, after AT&T’s 3G phaseout in 2022. Ford moved to compel their claims to arbitration based on the sales contracts or lease agreements the four plaintiffs signed, plus the “connected services” agreements three of the plaintiffs signed to operate their FordPass and Lincoln Way apps. But the U.S. District Court for Southern California sided with the plaintiffs, who argued that Ford can’t enforce those agreements, or that they don’t provide for mandatory arbitration.

Core Communications’ opening brief is due Jan. 16 at the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in its appeal of the district court’s Oct. 13 order granting AT&T summary judgment in its access service charges dispute with Core and Core's statewide affiliates in Delaware, New Jersey, Virginia and West Virginia (see 2311140049), said a briefing and scheduling order Thursday (docket 23-3022). AT&T’s answering brief is due within 30 days of service of Core’s opening brief, said the order. The U.S. District Court for Eastern Pennsylvania held that Core can’t collect the millions in unpaid switched access service charges it seeks from AT&T, because Core’s tariffs didn’t authorize it to bill for those services in the first place, making AT&T entitled to summary judgment on all of Core’s claims.

Ford is appealing to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals the Nov. 7 denial of its motion to compel the 3G telematics claims of four class-action plaintiffs to arbitration (see 2311080067), said its notice of appeal Friday (docket 3:22-cv-01716) in U.S. District Court for Southern California in San Diego. The plaintiffs allege the 3G modems on Ford vehicles they bought or leased were rendered inoperable, as were the roadside assistance features that depended on those modems, after AT&T’s 3G phaseout in 2022. They allege Ford knew as early as 2019 that AT&T’s phaseout of the 3G network was inevitable and yet continued to manufacture vehicles with 3G modems. Ford moved to compel their claims to arbitration based on the sales contracts or lease agreements the four plaintiffs signed, plus the “connected services” agreements three of the plaintiffs signed to operate their FordPass and Lincoln Way apps. But U.S. District Judge Michael Anello sided with the plaintiffs, who argued that Ford can’t enforce those agreements, or that they don’t provide for mandatory arbitration.