The FCC violated the Administrative Procedure Act when it amended rules incorporating four new equipment testing standards, and did so without the proper notice and comment protocol, alleged iFixit, Public Resource and Make Community in the opening brief Wednesday (23-1311) of their petition for review at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The opening brief asks that the court remand the rules to the FCC for what the three organizations contend should be a proper rulemaking (see 2311090002).
Paul Gluckman
Paul Gluckman, Executive Senior Editor, is a 30-year Warren Communications News veteran having joined the company in May 1989 to launch its Audio Week publication. In his long career, Paul has chronicled the rise and fall of physical entertainment media like the CD, DVD and Blu-ray and the advent of ATSC 3.0 broadcast technology from its rudimentary standardization roots to its anticipated 2020 commercial launch.
NCTA is seeking to intervene in support of the FCC and against four petitions for review consolidated in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the FCC’s Dec. 26 quadrennial review order for allegedly violating Section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act, said NCTA's unopposed motion Monday.
The ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox affiliates associations seek leave to intervene in support of the four petitions for review consolidated in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that challenge the FCC’s Dec. 26 quadrennial review order for allegedly violating Section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act (see 2403050075), said their unopposed joint motion Friday.
Hamilton Relay, a telecommunications relay service (TRS) provider, seeks to intervene in support of the Ohio Telecom Association’s petition for review challenging the FCC’s Dec. 21 order modifying and expanding the commission’s data breach notification rules on telecom carriers, VoIP providers and TRS providers (see 2402210026), said its unopposed motion Wednesday (docket 24-3133) in the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Hamilton provides TRS to individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, DeafBlind or have difficulty speaking, said its motion. The company provides intrastate and interstate text telephone, speech-to-speech and captioned telephone services in numerous states through individual state TRS contracts, nationwide relay service through its internet protocol captioned telephone service, which is regulated by the FCC, it said. Hamilton is entitled to intervene because it was a “party in interest” in the proceeding leading to the adoption of the order and the order’s changes to the FCC’s data breach notification rules adversely affect its interests, said the motion. Hamilton submitted comments in February 2023 in the FCC’s NPRM in the run-up to the order, it said. The order expands reporting obligations to the FCC and law enforcement agencies and imposes certain other duties on TRS providers pertaining to unauthorized access to or disclosure of customer proprietary network information and personally identifiable information, it said. In its February 2023 comments, Hamilton urged the FCC to consider how TRS providers are different from common carriers in the services they provide and the information they collect from their customers. The commission should ensure that any reporting obligations imposed on TRS providers “allow for the necessary flexibility to report relevant and actionable information to the appropriate law enforcement agencies and to customers,” it said then. It also urged the commission “to consider how its proposed rules will align, or potentially conflict, with existing state and federal privacy regimes,” it said.
The FCC disagrees with the motion of 20 industry petitioners for expedited briefing and oral argument of their consolidated challenges to the commission’s Nov. 20 digital discrimination order, according to the agency’s opposition brief Tuesday (docket 24-1179) in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The FCC’s March 7 response opposing Essential Network Technologies and MetComm.net's Feb. 26 emergency motion to expedite consideration of the companies' E-rate program appeal “confirms that the motion should be granted,” according to the petitioners’ reply Wednesday (docket 24-1027) at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Twenty industry and business groups, including CTIA, USTelecom and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, seek expedited briefing and oral argument on their consolidated petitions for review challenging the lawfulness of the FCC’s Nov. 20 digital discrimination order (see 2402290002), said their motion Wednesday (docket 24-1183) in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The FCC faces three petitions for review, all filed Friday, in separate circuits, challenging the lawfulness of the commission’s Dec. 26 quadrennial review order for allegedly violating Section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act. Nexstar Media Group filed its petition (docket 24-60088) in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Beasley Media Group and Tri-State Communications filed their joint petition (docket 24-10535) in the 11th Circuit, and Zimmer Radio of Mid-Missouri filed its petition (docket 24-1380) in the 8th Circuit.
Petitioners Maurine and Matthew Molak want the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to “disregard the statutory requirement” under Communications Act Section 405(a) that persons who weren’t parties before the FCC file a petition for reconsideration as a “condition precedent” to seeking judicial review, said the FCC and DOJ reply Friday (docket 23-60641) in support of their motion to dismiss the Molaks’ petition (see 2402070002).
The challenged FCC declaratory ruling authorizing E-rate funding for Wi-Fi on school buses “defies unambiguous statutory limits on the FCC’s authority,” said Maurine and Matthew Molak's opposition Friday (docket 23-60641) to the FCC’s Feb. 6 motion to dismiss their petition for review in which the Molaks ask the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to vacate that ruling (see 2402070002).