The FCC's method of funding the Universal Service Fund "violates the original understanding of the nondelegation doctrine," Consumers' Research told the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in a brief posted Tuesday in case 22-13315. The group challenged the commission's USF 2022 Q4 contribution factor in October (see 2210070072). "From start to finish, every aspect of the Universal Service Fund is designed to be as obscure, unresponsive, and opaque as possible," the group said, adding the FCC's delegation of administering USF to the Universal Service Administrative Co. "severely damages separation of power." Consumers' Research argued USF programs should be funded through Congressional appropriations. "Deciding how much money to raise is quintessentially a legislative policy choice," it said, and the FCC "unconstitutionally re-delegated its authority over the Universal Service Fund to USAC."

Unlike other defendants that quickly settled allegations that their websites were inaccessible to the blind and visually impaired in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, defendant American International Industries joined the fight against plaintiff Ramon Fontanez and moved Friday (docket 1:22-cv-05583) in U.S. District Court for Southern New York for dismissal of his complaint. Because,“as most courts that have examined the statute have recognized,” Congress never intended to include “virtual businesses” within the scope of the ADA, the Fontanez claims “fail as a matter of law and should be dismissed,” it said. American International "as a matter of law" operates a website, but does not have a "public-facing physical location," it said. "As such, it is not a place of public accommodation" under the ADA, "and therefore, is not covered by the statute," it said.

The defendants in a cellphone RF radiation lawsuit seek a deadline extension to Jan. 13 on the plaintiffs’ request for leave to conduct discovery as they prepare to defend against the defendants’ motion to dismiss on grounds that the case is preempted by federal law (see 2211040044), said an unopposed motion Friday (docket 2:21-cv-00923) in U.S. District Court for Western Louisiana in Lake Charles. The briefs were originally due Dec. 5. The April 2021 complaint argues the cellphone industry worked to suppress information showing many cellphones don’t comply with the FCC’s specific absorption rate limitations for how much RF radiation is absorbed by phone users, and says this led to Frank Walker’s death from brain cancer. Walker’s surviving wife and two sons are the plaintiffs in the case.

Arizona GOP Chair Kelli Ward and the House Jan. 6 Select Committee stipulated and agreed to the voluntary dismissal of Ward’s appeal to quash the committee’s subpoena for Ward’s T-Mobile phone records, said a filing Friday (docket 22-16473) at the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. The dismissal came three days after T-Mobile released the phone records to the committee, following the Supreme Court’s denial of Ward’s application to block the subpoena (see 2211140039). The committee sought the phone records to investigate Ward’s efforts to block certification of the 2020 election.

The parties in the Communications Workers of America lawsuit against Southwestern Bell and AT&T are to file by Nov. 30 copies of two documents “central” to CWA’s claims and referenced in its May 12 complaint, said an order Thursday (docket 1:22-cv-00455) by U.S. Magistrate Judge Susan Hightower for Western Texas. CWA sued to compel arbitration of a grievance filed by the union claiming violations of an existing collective bargaining agreement stemming from AT&T's spinoff of DirecTV. Hightower wants to see copies of the April 2017 CBA and a February 2021 agreement of contribution and subscription, providing that DirecTV post-spinoff is responsible only for obligations that were incurred after its assumption of the labor agreements. Southwestern Bell and AT&T moved in July to dismiss the complaint for CWA's failure to state a claim.

U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel for Western Texas in Austin granted AT&T’s unopposed motion for another four-week deadline extension to Dec. 16 to answer the Sept. 19 Communications Workers of America complaint so it can pursue settlement negotiations with the union (see [Ref:2211160047[), said his order Thursday (docket 1:22-cv-00954). The CWA’s complaint seeks to compel arbitration for DirecTV employees who it alleges were “unjustly” terminated after AT&T’s DirecTV spinoff.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has “repeatedly scolded” U.S. District Judge Alan Albright for the Western District of Texas for his refusal to transfer patent cases out of his jurisdiction, said McDermott Will in an analysis Thursday. It did so again Nov. 8 when it vacated his scheduling order and directed him to postpone fact discovery and other substantive proceedings until it considered Apple’s motion for transfer to the Northern District of California, said the firm. The Federal Circuit ordered that Apple’s motion to transfer “must proceed expeditiously as the first order of business,” it said. Apple argued that the district court abused its discretion in ordering the parties to complete 30 more weeks of fact discovery and six weeks of rebriefing the issue to decide on Apple’s transfer request. Apple noted that by the time the district court considered Apple’s motion, a full year will have passed since Apple initially sought the transfer, it said. The Federal Circuit agreed with Apple that the district court’s scheduling order was “a clear abuse of discretion,” it said.

The final pretrial conference is set for Dec. 7, 2023, in AT&T’s false advertising complaint against T-Mobile, said a scheduling order (docket 4:22-cv-00760) signed Thursday by U.S. District Judge Amos Mazzant for Eastern Texas in Sherman. An actual trial date is yet to be determined, said Mazzant’s order. AT&T’s complaint alleges that multiple claims in T-Mobile’s BannedSeniors.com campaign are “literally false” when they assert that 92% of seniors in the U.S. can’t get a wireless discount from AT&T (see 2211020003).

AT&T and T-Mobile each met its obligation to serve initial discovery disclosures on the other in AT&T’s false advertising complaint against its competitor, they said in separate notices Monday and Tuesday (docket 4:22-cv-00760) in U.S. District Court for Eastern Texas in Sherman. The document exchanges took place Monday, said both notices. AT&T alleges in its complaint that each of the claims in T-Mobile’s BannedSeniors.com campaign is "literally false" when T-Mobile asserts that 92% of U.S. seniors can't get an AT&T discount because they live outside Florida (see 2211130002). T-Mobile moved Sept. 16 to dismiss the case for lack of personal jurisdiction on grounds that AT&T's claims do not belong in a Texas court.

AT&T needs another four-week deadline extension to Dec. 16 to answer the Sept. 19 Communications Workers of America complaint to compel arbitration for DirecTV employees who CWA alleges were “unjustly” terminated after AT&T’s DirecTV spinoff (see 2210090002), said AT&T's unopposed motion Tuesday (docket 1:22-cv-00954) at the U.S. District Court for Western Texas in Austin. AT&T and the CWA “are actively engaged in ongoing negotiations for the resolution of this matter,” said the motion. “Additional time is needed and warranted so that the parties may focus on achieving a settlement and have sufficient time to fully exhaust those settlement efforts, which would moot the need for any responsive pleading."