T-Mobile, State AGs Ask Court to Resolve Scheduling, Deposition Differences
T-Mobile and state attorneys general disagreed how timing of carriers’ disclosure about DOJ talks would affect the scheduled Oct. 7 trial date for the AGs’ lawsuit against the company's Sprint buy, in Friday letters at U.S. District Court for the…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
Southern District of New York. They asked the court to resolve the differences. States repeatedly told carriers they couldn't agree to an Oct. 7 trial date unless they disclosed all agreements with DOJ, but defendants now suggest a delay in disclosure won't necessarily extend the trial date, plaintiffs wrote (in Pacer). T-Mobile agreed to divulge information by certain dates but doesn’t think a one-day delay requires postponing the trial, it said (in Pacer). Have a status conference to assess whether schedule changes are needed, the carrier said. State plaintiffs don't need as much deposition time as requested because they “are not operating on a blank slate,” having worked with DOJ in its yearlong investigation, T-Mobile said. States disagreed, saying they “are entitled to the discovery provided under the federal rules to prepare their case, obtain admissible evidence, and prepare the necessary expert analysis for trial.” States want all depositions in New York or California, with four optionally in other locations to accommodate witnesses, they said. That may be convenient for plaintiffs but not for all defendants’ employees, especially foreign ones, T-Mobile said. Meanwhile, the California Public Utilities Commission Tuesday afternoon hadn’t released a proposed decision, which would be required to get it on the Aug. 1 voting agenda (see 1907010040).