Huawei asked the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to hear its case seeking to overturn the FCC ban on rural eligible telecom carriers using USF programs to buy equipment from the Chinese firm. Huawei filed the case a year ago (see 1912050050). The FCC’s order approved Thursday (see 2012100054) “leaves no doubt that Huawei’s petition is ripe,” said a filing (in Pacer) posted Friday in docket 19-60896: The order “confirms that only judicial review can relieve Huawei from enforcement of the USF rule.” Protecting national security is a “lame excuse” to oppress certain Chinese enterprises, said a Chinese Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson Friday, responding to the FCC’s order approval. “Huawei has built more than 1,500 networks in more than 170 countries and regions,” with no “network security incidents,” she said. “No country has been able to come up with evidence to prove Huawei products have back doors, including the United States, whom we've challenged many times to present evidence.” China urges the U.S. to “stop its arbitrary use” of national security as a pretense for its “unjustified crackdown on certain Chinese enterprises,” she said.
Huawei asked the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to hear its case seeking to overturn the FCC ban on rural eligible telecom carriers using USF programs to buy equipment from the Chinese firm. Huawei filed the case a year ago (see 1912050050). The FCC’s order approved Thursday (see 2012100054) “leaves no doubt that Huawei’s petition is ripe,” said a filing (in Pacer) posted Friday in docket 19-60896: The order “confirms that only judicial review can relieve Huawei from enforcement of the USF rule.” Protecting national security is a “lame excuse” to oppress certain Chinese enterprises, said a Chinese Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson Friday, responding to the FCC’s order approval. “Huawei has built more than 1,500 networks in more than 170 countries and regions,” with no “network security incidents,” she said. “No country has been able to come up with evidence to prove Huawei products have back doors, including the United States, whom we've challenged many times to present evidence.” China urges the U.S. to “stop its arbitrary use” of national security as a pretense for its “unjustified crackdown on certain Chinese enterprises,” she said.
China may be “attempting to drive a high-tech wedge” between the U.S. and U.K. via concerns about the national security implications of allowing equipment from Huawei on telecom infrastructure, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., told the U.K. House of Commons’ Defense Select Committee Tuesday. Cotton and other U.S. lawmakers criticized the U.K. allowing Huawei on “non-core” parts of communications infrastructure but bar it from “sensitive locations” like military bases (see 2001280074). Recent media reports claim the U.K. government may be planning to change that.
The move to open-radio access networks in wireless is a natural evolution, follows trends in other industries and could help the U.S. make networks more secure, speakers said during a Hudson Institute webinar Tuesday. The FCC postponed a March 26 summit on 5G-focused O-RAN technology because of coronavirus concerns (see 2003120071) and hasn’t set a new date, a spokesperson confirmed now. In February, Attorney General William Barr said the O-RAN is “just pie in the sky” and a “completely untested” approach that would “take many years to get off the ground.”
China may be “attempting to drive a high-tech wedge” between the U.S. and U.K. via concerns about the national security implications of allowing equipment from Huawei on telecom infrastructure, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., told the U.K. House of Commons’ Defense Select Committee Tuesday. Cotton and other U.S. lawmakers criticized the U.K. allowing Huawei on “non-core” parts of communications infrastructure but bar it from “sensitive locations” like military bases (see 2001280074). Recent media reports claim the U.K. government may be planning to change that.
Huawei petitioned the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn the FCC banning rural eligible telecom carriers from using USF programs to buy equipment that could come from the Chinese firm, the company said Thursday. Last month, the FCC voted, for national security, to ban Huawei and ZTE equipment on networks bought with USF dollars (see 1911220033). The FCC declined comment now.
Huawei petitioned the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn the FCC banning rural eligible telecom carriers from using USF programs to buy equipment that could come from the Chinese firm, the company said Thursday. Last month, the FCC voted, for national security, to ban Huawei and ZTE equipment on networks bought with USF dollars (see 1911220033). The FCC declined comment now.
Sprint said the LEC Coalition "merely recycles an argument" the FCC has rejected about applying access charges to intraMTA (major trading area) traffic. "The LECs have provided no reason why the Commission should not deny their petition for declaratory ruling and/or file an amicus brief" backing reversal of a district court ruling in a 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals case, said the group's filing, posted Thursday in FCC docket 14-228. The coalition asked the FCC not to undercut district court decisions, and to pursue a rulemaking if it seeks to let interexchange carriers route commingled traffic through Feature Group D trunks while exempting intraMTA wireless traffic from access charges (see 1808130039). "The LECs contend that the Commission’s rules currently permit them to impose access charges on IXCs delivering intraMTA calls," Sprint said. "But the Commission squarely rejected the LECs’ position" in its 2011 USF and intercarrier-compensation order, confirming prior decisions that intraMTA traffic isn't subject to access charges but to reciprocal compensation, said Sprint. It added that the district court erred in concluding FCC rules allowed LECs to charge reciprocal compensation and access charges to the traffic even though both regimes "have never been applied to the same calls."
The Supreme Court could eventually review USF False Claim Act (FCA) litigation, a lawyer in one of the cases said at an FCBA seminar Wednesday. Vinson & Elkins attorney Jeremy Marwell said fraud allegations against recipients of USF support don’t qualify under the FCA, but he acknowledged it’s a “close question,” particularly in light of mixed court rulings to date. While Marwell was on the winning side of a July 2014 E-rate decision by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled the FCA doesn’t apply to USF programs (United States ex rel. Shupe v. Cisco, No. 13-40807), other cases are pending in the 7th Circuit and D.C. Circuit, which could create a circuit split. Marwell said he “wouldn’t be surprised” if the cases go to the high court.
Release of the FCC net neutrality order brought limited clarity to how the rules and the commission’s accompanying reclassification of broadband as a Communications Act Title II service will affect state telecom regulation, state telecom lawyers and observers said in interviews last week. That lack of clarity largely stems from continued uncertainty about whether the net neutrality rules -- and particularly Title II reclassification -- will survive legal scrutiny, lawyers said. Alamo Broadband and USTelecom filed lawsuits Monday seeking reviews of the net neutrality order at the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, respectively (see 1503230066). The order faces continued scrutiny on Capitol Hill (see 1503200048).