The Computer & Communications Industry Association and Incompas filed in support of Dish Network in its pursuit of extra time to buy 800 MHz spectrum from T-Mobile. T-Mobile and parent Deutsche Telekom opposed the extension (see 2308280055), which is before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. “The Motion requests a reasonable, 10-month extension of time for DISH to exercise its right, granted by the Court, to purchase several 800 MHz Spectrum Licenses from T-Mobile,” said a brief filed Thursday. “CCIA and INCOMPAS urge the Court to grant the Motion as the best means to replace the competition lost via the T-Mobile-Sprint merger, preserve consumer choice, and encourage broad-reaching, cost-effective wireless service,” they said: “Competition in the wireless industry remains in a delicate state.” The FCC’s 2022 Communications Marketplace said “the U.S. communications marketplace is in a substantial state of change and re-examination,” citing T-Mobile’s buy of Sprint as one of “the recent major transactions that have had and will continue to have an effect on the competitive landscape,” the brief said. “As the leading advocate for competition, we believe this extension is critical to ensure consumers have more choices in the marketplace,” said Incompas President Angie Kronenberg: “We support DISH’s request and urge the court to grant the extension.”

U.S. District Judge Susan Wigenton for New Jersey in Newark granted BMW of North America's motion to dismiss plaintiff Peter Grayson’s 3G telematics claims and to compel those claims to arbitration, said her signed letter opinion Monday (docket 2:22-cv-06103). Grayson’s class action alleged BMW did nothing to preserve its vehicles’ roadside safety features during AT&T’s 3G service shutdown, and BMW responded that Grayson signed an “unambiguous” arbitration agreement (see 2301310001). Grayson doesn’t “contest the validity” of the arbitration clause in the roadside services subscriber agreement, said the judge’s letter opinion. He instead “challenges the scope” of the subscriber agreement and urges the court to say the agreement isn’t at issue because the outdated telematics equipment in his car is “a physical component of the vehicle” and isn’t covered by the roadside services agreement, it said. But when reviewing the allegations in his complaint, Grayson’s argument is “unavailing,” it said. Case law shows “a heavy presumption in favor of enforcing arbitration clauses,” said the opinion. Court precedent also shows arbitration shouldn’t be denied unless it may be said with “positive assurance” that the arbitration clause isn’t susceptible to an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute, it said. Grayson hasn’t shown with positive assurance “that his claims are outside the scope of the arbitration agreement,” it said. Though Grayson asserts his action concerns the “operability of a piece of hardware that is a physical part of BMW cars," his lawsuit “ostensibly pertains to the loss of service” due to the inability of the telematics equipment “to adapt to upgraded wireless service,” said the opinion. As such, the facts and allegations implicate the roadside services subscription agreement and its arbitration provisions, “as the loss of service is inextricably intertwined throughout the allegations,” it said. “At bottom,” the complaint doesn’t solely allege there’s a defective physical vehicle part at issue, said the opinion. It rather alleges a “presumably functioning physical vehicle part” can no longer enable a service Grayson desires to use “because wireless carriers have upgraded their capabilities past the functional usage of the part,” it said. These allegations “specifically concern the loss of service in conjunction with the design of the part, and thus directly implicate” the service agreement and its arbitration clause, it said.

None of the "attacks" from defendant Volkswagen Group of America against the 3G telematics claims of the four plaintiffs in the two consolidated class actions “can earn a dismissal,” said the plaintiffs’ memorandum of law Tuesday (docket 2:22-cv-05896) in U.S. District Court for New Jersey in Newark in opposition to VWGoA’s motion to dismiss (see 2306200001). VWGoA vehicles were factory-equipped with 3G-only telematics devices, but by 2014, 4G LTE was replacing 3G, said the memorandum. VW knew “of imminent new generations of wireless technology and could have manufactured telematics adaptable to the next generation,” it said. There was no disclosure “or even suggestion” that VW’s roadside services “would be rendered obsolete once 3G was phased out” or that those features “were only temporary or had only a limited life,” it said. As for the vehicle model years after 4G became prevalent, VWGoA “never disclosed that its equipment was one generation behind the standard,” it said.

The four plaintiffs who brought the class action against Ford for selling or leasing them vehicles with obsolete 3G telematics equipment (see 2305090035) “have repeatedly agreed to arbitrate their claims,” said Ford’s motion Thursday (docket 3:22-cv-01716) in U.S. District Court for Southern California in San Diego to compel their disputes to arbitration and to stay their class action pending the outcome of that arbitration. If the court decides Ford is entitled to enforce the arbitration provisions in the sale contracts or lease agreements the plaintiffs signed, as it should under California law, “it must defer any questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator,” said Ford. The four allege they lost the functionality of roadside assistance and other connected services when major carriers like AT&T discontinued 3G wireless in 2022.

Plaintiff Michael Scriber amended his class action Monday in U.S. District Court for Southern California in San Diego to add three new plaintiffs and additional allegations that Ford shortchanged customers by installing obsolete telematics equipment in its vehicles, rendering the equipment useless when major wireless carriers discontinued their 3G service (see 2304170047). The three new plaintiffs, Stacy Powell, Doug Harrigan and Susan Wisner Phillips, allege, like Scriber, that Ford didn't tell them about the impending demise of their roadside assistance services. Plaintiff Phillips further alleges the anti-theft system installed in her vehicle that allowed her to identify her vehicle’s location in case of theft no longer functions, said the amended complaint (docket 3:22-cv-01716). Phillips’ insurance carrier provides a premium discount for a functional vehicle anti-theft system, but the discount will not longer be available due to Ford’s misconduct, it said.

Plaintiff George Schwarz voluntarily dismissed with prejudice his 3G telematics claims against Nissan North America, said his notice Wednesday (docket 3:22-cv-00933) in U.S. District Court for Middle Tennessee in Nashville. Schwarz had alleged injury on behalf of himself and a putative class of other Nissan owners arising from the loss of connected vehicle services when the major wireless carriers shut down their 3G services, rendering the telematics equipment that Nissan installed in its vehicles obsolete. Nissan moved March 20 to compel Schwarz’s dispute to arbitration, arguing that the scope of the arbitration provision he agreed to “plainly encompasses the allegations” he seeks to assert under the Federal Arbitration Act (see 2303210057)

Defendant Ford and plaintiff Michael Scriber stipulate to set a schedule for Scriber to file an amended 3G telematics complaint against the automaker with additional plaintiffs and allegations, and to allow Ford to respond to that complaint 30 days after that filing, said their joint motion Friday (docket 3:22-cv-01716) in U.S. District Court for Southern California in San Diego. Scribner’s first amended complaint would be due May 8, and Ford’s answer, including its motion to compel Scriber’s dispute to arbitration, June 7, said the motion. Scriber’s case against Ford is one of about a half-dozen class actions in various jurisdictions that seek to make automakers accountable for discontinuing in-vehicle reception of 3G network services due to obsolete telematics equipment installed in their vehicles (see 2211070032).

Plaintiff George Schwarz and defendant Nissan North America ask that Wednesday’s case management conference in Schwartz’s 3G telematics class action against the automaker be rescheduled for a later date, after Nissan’s March 20 motion to compel Schwartz’s dispute to arbitration (see 2303210057) “is fully briefed,” said their joint motion Friday (docket 3:22-cv-00933) in U.S. District Court for Middle Tennessee in Nashville. As grounds for their joint motion, the parties “continue to confer with regard to this motion and have exchanged information related to the arbitration clause at issue,” it said. Schwartz’s counsel “is considering Nissan’s position to assess whether motion practice is necessary,” or whether the parties “can reach any agreements to narrow or obviate the need for motion practice,” it said. Nissan agrees a continuance of the case management conference would be a more efficient use of the parties’ and the court’s time, it said. Schwarz alleges injury on behalf of himself and a putative class of other Nissan owners arising from his loss of connected vehicle services when the carriers shut down their 3G wireless services because Nissan installed obsolete telematics equipment in its vehicles. The scope of the arbitration provision Schwartz agreed to “plainly encompasses the allegations” he seeks to assert under the Federal Arbitration Act, said Nissan.

Plaintiff Peter Grayson voluntarily dismissed without prejudice his 3G telematics claims against Volkswagen Group of America and VW’s German parent, said a notice he filed Monday (docket 3:22-cv-06105) in U.S. District Court for New Jersey in Trenton. Each party will bear its own costs, it said. His claims remain against Porsche Cars North America (PCNA). He previously dismissed his claims against Porsche’s German parent (see 2302230003). Grayson’s case against PCNA is one of about a half-dozen class actions pending in various jurisdictions seeking to hold automakers accountable for discontinuing in-vehicle reception of 3G network services like roadside assistance without telling consumers their vehicle telematics equipment wouldn't work after wireless carriers shut down their 3G service offerings. Grayson himself is the plaintiff in a nearly identical complaint against BMW (see 2303080055).

There’s “no dispute” that plaintiff Peter Grayson “entered into a valid arbitration agreement” with BMW North America when he bought his 2014 BMW 428i xDrive Coupe in May 2014, said BMW’s reply Monday (docket 2:22-cv-06103) in U.S. District Court for New Jersey in Newark in further support of its motion to compel Grayson’s case to arbitration (see 2301310001). The only dispute before the court is whether Grayson’s claims “fall within the scope” of the arbitration agreement he signed, it said: “They do.” Grayson’s claims all stem from his inability to access BMW roadside services and other telematics features due to the wireless carriers’ phaseout of 3G services, said BMW. The plaintiff urges the court to deny BMW’s motion to compel, arguing his lawsuit concerns the operability of a piece of hardware, the telematics control unit, that's a physical part of BMW cars, the carmaker said. But Grayson’s argument is “flawed” and contrary to the allegations in his complaint, it said.