FCC and industry officials explored the possibility of an inmate calling service deal at a meeting Wednesday, said a Securus Technologies filing Friday in docket 12-375. Parties expressed an interest in achieving inmate calling service regulatory certainty but didn't discuss substantive proposals, it said. Parts of a 2015 FCC order capping ICS rates and restricting certain fees and practices (see 1510220059) have been stayed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit pending further review on the merits of various legal challenges (see 1603070055 and 1603230058).
The parties to FCC inmate calling service litigation suggested the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit largely consolidate briefing that would last 175 days. The FCC, ICS providers and others -- at the urging of the court -- submitted a joint proposed briefing format and schedule Monday in the case (Global Tel*Link v. FCC, No. 15-1461). The filing said petitioners and intervenors were challenging an FCC 2015 order that "adopts permanent tiered per-minute rate caps for all inmate calling services ('ICS'), asserts jurisdiction over both interstate and intrastate calls, regulates ancillary and transaction fees associated with ICS, imposes annual reporting and certification requirements, and asserts jurisdiction over ICS calls carried over both traditional telephone and other advanced technology such as VoIP." The parties said the challenges raised two distinct sets of issues -- those raised by ICS providers and those raised by state and county officials -- and accordingly asked to file separate briefs. Under the proposal, the 12 state government petitioners and intervenors would file consolidated initial and reply briefs while the five ICS providers -- CenturyLink, GTL, Pay Tel Communications, Securus and Telmate -- would file most of their arguments in initial and reply briefs, while Securus would also file shorter briefs analyzing confidential cost data it submitted on credit card transactions and "single-call services." Under proposed word limits, the FCC and its supporters, which include Martha Wright Petitioners and Network Communications International (a wholesale-oriented ICS provider), would receive the same number of words, 29,500, for their responses as the challengers in their initial briefs. The initial industry and state briefs would be due 40 days from the date of the court's order setting the schedule, followed 60 days later by the FCC response brief and intervenor briefs 15 days after the FCC brief. The challengers would then have 30 more days to file their reply briefs, with final briefs incorporating a joint appendix due 30 days after that. The court previously stayed the FCC rate caps, one set of ancillary fees and application of 2013 interim rate caps to intrastate services, pending further review (see 1603070055 and 1603230058).
A court stayed FCC application of 2013 rate caps to intrastate inmate calling services. The interim 2013 rate caps had applied to interstate ICS rates, but the FCC said they extended to intrastate rates due to an ICS definitional change in a 2015 order. Securus and other ICS providers then asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to extend its previous stay of tougher 2015 rate caps to prevent the FCC from applying the 2013 rate caps to intrastate ICS, pending further judicial review. A three-judge panel of the court agreed Wednesday in a brief ruling shortly after a comment deadline (Global Tel*Link v. FCC, No. 15-1461).
The FCC and others opposed inmate calling service provider motions to revise a previous court stay order so that the commission's 2013 interim price caps can't be applied to intrastate ICS rates, pending further judicial review of underlying challenges to a 2015 agency order (Global Tel*Link v. FCC, No. 15-461). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit stayed FCC 2015 rate caps of 11 to 22 cents per minute for interstate and intrastate ICS rates (see 1603070055). But the D.C. Circuit didn't stay the 2013 interim caps of 21 and 25 cents/minute on interstate ICS rates nor a 2015 FCC change removing the "interstate" designation from the ICS definition, the FCC said Tuesday. It opposed a motion from Securus (see 1603170040) and subsequently filed motions from Global Tel*Link and Telmate. "Granting such relief would require this Court to expand the limited stay it only recently -- and carefully -- crafted. There is no cause to do so," the FCC said in its opposition. "The Commission’s new rules, by their terms, extended the interim rate caps to intrastate inmate calls in the event the permanent rate caps (but not the amended definition of inmate calling services) were stayed. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 64.6000(j); 64.6030. Two parties sought a stay of the interim rate caps; no party requested a stay of the amended definition. Because the Court declined to stay the interim rate caps, they now apply to intrastate (as well as interstate) calls. That result is entirely reasonable." The Wright Petitioners, which advocate for the phone rights of inmates and their families, filed in support of the FCC. CenturyLink backed the other ICS providers Monday.
Securus Technologies challenged in court the FCC’s interpretation of a stay order from the court on inmate calling service rates released Wednesday. The FCC released a public notice that found that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit didn’t stay the definition of inmate calling from the 2015 ICS order, which included interstate and intrastate calling, so 2013 rates will apply to both (see 1603160068). Securus sought a modification of its initial stay.
The FCC Wireline Bureau denied a Global Tel*Link waiver request seeking more time to implement a "no minimum balance requirement" for prisons in the agency's 2015 inmate calling service order (see 1510220059). "GTL did not provide sufficient justification to warrant a temporary waiver of section 64.6100(a) of the Commission’s rules, which prohibits inmate calling service (ICS) providers from requiring end users to deposit a minimum amount of money in a debit or prepaid calling account," said a bureau order issued Monday in docket 12-375. GTL and other ICS providers must thus eliminate minimum deposit requirements by Thursday for inmates in prisons they serve, the bureau said. GTL had sought an extra 90 days to implement the requirement for prisons so it would correspond with the June 20 deadline for implementing the rule for jails (see 1601130066).
The FCC rejected inmate calling service providers' objections to allowing the outside counsel of competitor Pay Tel Communications to view their commercially sensitive information pursuant a protective order in the ICS rulemaking. In an order Monday in docket 12-375, the commission denied a Securus application for review of an October 2014 Wireline Bureau order that sided with Pay Tel's request. The company's outside counsel didn't get access to the Securus data during the review, the agency said. The FCC also denied similar objections filed by Global Tel*Link and Telmate. The ICS providers said Pay Tel's outside counsel was too close to the rival company. But the FCC ordered the ICS providers to give Pay Tel's outside counsel access to the data within 10 business days. "Consistent with the general restrictions of a protective order, Pay Tel is entitled to have the representation it desires, and its outside counsel is entitled to have access to all the information it needs to zealously represent its client. Having found that Pay Tel’s outside counsel are not engaged in competitive decision-making and are eligible to review information under the Protective Order, we reject the Objectors’ arguments to prevent them from doing so," the commission said. The ICS rulemaking resulted in a November order restricting ICS rates and fees along with a Further NPRM seeking comment on more possible changes. The FCC said access to the confidential information was still at issue because of the new proceeding and legal challenges to the November order in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which Monday stayed agency rate caps and one set of ancillary fee limits (see 1603070055). Commissioner Mike O'Rielly dissented from Monday's order, saying in a statement the FCC hadn't adequately considered the objections of Global Tel*Link, Securus and Telmate. Commissioner Ajit Pai didn't dissent but issued a statement criticizing the FCC comments about Pay Tel's rights to zealous representation and other things. "It's a little late for such high-minded rhetoric," he said. "How was Pay Tel’s outside counsel supposed to 'zealously represent its client' or 'meaningfully participate' in this rulemaking with 'one hand [tied] behind counsels’ backs'? The Order offers no answer. Nor does it offer any reason for the long delay in adjudicating this dispute. Although I support today’s order -- the proverb 'better late than never' comes to mind -- I am disturbed that we may have deprived a party of its administrative rights through inaction. That’s unacceptable and yet another troubling sign that the FCC’s processes are in desperate need of reform."
Federal judges blocked new FCC inmate calling service rate caps and one other set of fee restrictions, pending further judicial review, while leaving untouched the rest of the commission’s 2015 ICS order. In a short order Monday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit partially granted ICS provider motions, issuing a stay of rules capping interstate and intrastate ICS rates at between 11 cents and 22 cents per minute, and of a rule capping ancillary fees for single-call and related services, but denied the stay requests in all other respects in the consolidated case Global Tel*Link v. FCC, No. 15-1461. It also denied a separate motion of Oklahoma state officials seeking a stay.
The FCC and others opposed an Oklahoma bid to stay inmate calling service (ICS) rules set by the commission capping intrastate rates (see 1602230034). The FCC said Oklahoma officials missed a federal court deadline for stay motions, and hadn't even sought an administrative stay from the commission itself, as the agency said federal appellate procedures generally require. “There is no cause to excuse Oklahoma’s refusal to comply with the obligations set forth by this Court and the Federal rules,” the FCC said Friday in its opposition filing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which is reviewing the consolidated case (Global Tel*Link v. FCC, No. 15-1461). The FCC said ICS providers filed stay requests at the FCC, which were denied (see 1601220040), and with the D.C. Circuit, which set a Feb. 5 deadline for any further such requests (see 1602040023); but the Oklahoma officials didn't file their stay request until Feb. 22. Even if the D.C. Circuit considers the Oklahoma stay request, the FCC said the court should deny it because the state was unlikely to succeed on the merits of its underlying challenge, hadn't shown it would suffer irreparable harm absent a stay, and a stay would harm third parties and the public interest. The FCC said it didn't intrude on state authority by capping intrastate rates, but simply implemented sections 276 and 201 of the federal Communications Act to ensure that compensation for interstate and intrastate ICS is fair. The FCC was backed in opposing the Oklahoma stay motion by a filing from the Martha Wright Petitioners, which includes numerous groups and individuals advocating for the ICS rights of inmates and their families. They said it was “implausible that Oklahoma was not aware of the FCC Order in time to have filed a timely motion for stay with the agency.” Meanwhile, the states of Arkansas, Arizona, Kansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Missouri, Nevada and Wisconsin as well as Indiana sheriffs’ groups filed motions (here and here) seeking to intervene on behalf of Oklahoma.
A news release from Global Tel*Link touting a "capstone victory" in a Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) review of a patent issued to industry competitor Securus is "grossly inaccurate" and contains "clearly misleading" statements, Securus said in a news release Monday. The GTL news release, issued Friday, said Securus "tried to patent well known ideas ... [and] got caught with their hand in the cookie jar," after the PTAB issued a final decision finding Securus' claims in the patent to be "unpatentable." The GTL release also said that recent PTAB proceedings revealed "Securus misled patent examiners while seeking patents." Securus "corrected" 10 statements made in GTL's news release -- most refuting claims of misleading patent officials and that GTL is "winning" the patent battle. In the release, Securus said GTL "gives the carriers in our industry a black eye" because of its current and past behavior. GTL didn't comment.