The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is considering X’s appeal against California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) for an upcoming oral argument calendar in San Francisco in July or August, said a text-only docket notice Friday (docket 24-271). X is seeking to reverse the district court's Dec. 28 denial of its motion for a preliminary injunction to block Bonta from enforcing AB-587, the state's social media transparency law (see 2401160031). X seeks to block AB-587's enforcement on grounds that it violates the First Amendment and that federal law preempts it.

The allegations of the Daily Wire, Federalist Media and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) that the State Department and its Global Engagement Center (CEG) have engaged in a “widespread government censorship regime” to stifle right-leaning media “are laden with hyperbole and lack any factual support or basis in the law,” said DOJ’s response Friday (docket 6:23-cv-00609) in U.S. District Court for Eastern Texas in Tyler in opposition to the plaintiffs’ Feb. 6 motion for a preliminary injunction (see 2402080044). GEC is an office tasked by Congress “with an essential foreign policy mission to respond to urgent, novel, and rapidly evolving threats from disinformation campaigns waged by America’s foreign adversaries,” said DOJ. Congress recognized that technology is critical to GEC’s mission “because the overwhelming majority of disinformation from foreign state and non-state actors is spread online,” it said. The plaintiffs’ claims “suffer from a central Article III problem,” it said. “As a threshold matter, the complaint should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction,” it said. Even accepting the complaint’s allegations as true, the speculative chain of possibilities that they describe can’t establish any injury-in-fact that’s certainly impending and traceable to the defendants’ conduct or redressable by the court, it said. The plaintiffs’ theory of standing also can’t survive a factual attack under Rule 12(b)(1), “because multiple links in their alleged causal chain are conclusively contradicted by the record,” it said.

Defendants Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman won’t be testifying at trial on their roles in the robocall campaign to suppress Black citizens' mail-in votes in the run-up to the 2020 election (see 2312040022) said their response Monday (docket 1:20-cv-08668) to Friday’s order from U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff for Southern New York in Manhattan instructing them to disclose their intentions. Wohl and Burkman never responded to the plaintiffs’ March 1 motion in limine to compel them to disclose whether they plan to appear at trial. Their response Monday in the negative precludes them now from appearing, according to Rakoff’s order. Had they responded in the affirmative, they would have been required to make themselves available for the plaintiffs’ April 1 depositions, said the order. U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero, Rakoff’s predecessor on the case, granted summary judgment for the plaintiffs a year ago (see 2303090003), and the jury trial that opens April 15 is to assess damages.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court panel to which Prewitt Management’s appeal against Charter Communications was assigned has determined that oral argument won’t be required in the case, said a signed clerk’s notice Thursday (docket 23-50419). The case will be decided “in due course on the record and briefs on file,” said the notice. The 5th Circuit previously calendared oral argument in the appeal for April 4 in New Orleans (see 2402220050). Prewitt seeks the reversal of the district court’s declaratory judgment absolving Charter of any further monetary obligations under a 1964 cable-permit revenue-sharing agreement in Texas between their predecessor companies (see 2309060033).

The parties in Arm’s breach of contract and trademark infringement dispute with Qualcomm submit Dec. 16 as the date when the parties will be available for trial, Arm’s counsel Anne Shea Gaza of Young Conaway wrote U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika for Delaware in a letter Thursday (docket 1:22-cv-01146). The judge previously scheduled a five-day jury trial to begin Sept. 23 (see 2212190066). Arm alleges that Qualcomm spent more than $1 billion to buy Nuvia, a startup led by former Apple and Google engineers that licensed Arm technologies to develop high-performance processor cores for semiconductor chips. Arm alleges that Qualcomm caused Nuvia to breach its Arm licenses, leading Arm to terminate those licenses, in turn requiring Qualcomm and Nuvia to stop using and destroy any Arm-based technology developed under the licenses. Qualcomm's counterclaims argue Arm's allegations have no legal or contractual basis because Qualcomm maintains its own Arm licenses.

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation finalized conditional transfer order 29 (CTO-29) in In Re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation, said a clerk’s order (docket 3047) Thursday. Guffey v. Meta Platforms et al (docket 0:24-cv-01025) was transferred from U.S. District Court for South Carolina. The JPML transferred 20 civil actions to the U.S. District Court for Northern California for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings on Oct. 6, 2022. Since then, 133 additional actions have been transferred to the district and assigned to U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, it said. The cases allege social media companies are responsible for a rise in mental health disorders among U.S. youth.

U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter for Southern New York in Manhattan denied a former Amazon third-party seller's petition to vacate an arbitrator’s award in Amazon’s favor and granted Amazon’s cross-motion to confirm that award, said Carter’s signed order Tuesday (docket 1:23-cv-03054). Hong Kong company Cowin Technology sought recovery of more than $1 million in sales proceeds that Amazon seized, and arbitrator Howard Reiss let it keep, when it deactivated the seller’s account for selling counterfeit goods online and abusing consumer reviews, in violation of the parties’ business solutions agreement (BSA) (see 2304130054). Cowin contended that the court should vacate the award because the award was irrational and because arbitrator Reiss manifestly disregarded the law by finding Section 2 of the BSA was enforceable. It also argued that enforcement of Section 2 violated public policy. But the judge rejected all three claims as the basis for vacating the award, said his order. Cowin hasn’t shown that Reiss manifestly disregarded the law in reaching his decision that Section 2 of the BSA was enforceable, it said. The judge also agreed with the arbitrator that Section 2 didn't violate public policy, it said.

Plaintiff Greg Bostard and defendant Verizon agree on a March 19 deadline for Bostard’s filing of a second amended complaint “solely for the purpose of adding an additional plaintiff and the specific allegations identifying that new plaintiff,” said their proposed briefing schedule Tuesday (docket 1:23-cv-08564) in U.S. District Court for New Jersey in Newark. April 18 is the parties’ proposed deadline for Verizon’s filing of a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint, it said. Bostard is a former Comcast utility pole worker who wants Verizon to pay for his medical monitoring due to his 29 years of exposure to Verizon’s toxic lead cables (see 2308240005). His first amended complaint Jan. 12 asserted that he’s not seeking personal injury damages but rather relief for the “present economic injury” he suffers by having to pay for his own lead-poisoning tests (see 2401160001).

Andrew Haymore was the victim for seven months of in-game aggravated cyber harassment, cyberstalking and cyberbullying, including by employees of Amazon Games, alleged his Jan. 9 complaint in Sacramento County Superior Court, removed by Amazon Friday (docket 2:24-cv-00729) to U.S. District Court for Eastern California in Sacramento. Amazon Games, by creating New World, the massively multiplayer online role-playing game, “facilitated random players and organized groups of players and gave them the platform and ability” to commit the acts against Haymore, said his complaint. The pro se plaintiff describes himself as a U.S. Army veteran who suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder. Haymore contacted Amazon Games’ chat support Aug. 23, and again Sept. 9, complaining about the in-game harassment, said the complaint. Trouble tickets were created online, but little else was done, it said. The Sacramento resident kept audio and video recordings of his interactions with Amazon and Amazon Games employees, most of whom “ignored his pleas for help,” it said. He alleges gross negligence, contending that Amazon failed in its “duty to the consumer to keep the gaming environment safe.” Amazon doesn’t waive “its respective rights to assert any defense” of Haymore's allegations, said its notice of removal. Amazon also reserves its right to compel Haymore’s claims to arbitration or to move to dismiss his action for failure to state a claim, said the notice.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court is considering plaintiff-appellant Narciso Fuentes' appeal against Dish Network for an upcoming oral argument calendar in San Francisco in July or August, said a text-only docket notice Thursday (docket 23-15989). Fuentes is challenging Dish’s alleged violations of California’s Home Solicitation Sales Act for its refusal to provide “in-kind language translations” of its contracts and cancellation right disclosures (see 2312200012). Fuentes is asking the 9th Circuit to affirm the district court’s summary judgment order in his favor and to reverse the denial of his motion for remand.