Plaintiffs' attempt to bring yet another amended complaint related to AT&T's ownership of old cables with lead contamination is a "brazen attempt to skirt the Rules," the carrier told the U.S. District Court for Northern Texas last week (docket 3:24-cv-01196). In an emergency motion to strike, AT&T said the amended class-action securities fraud complaint is an attempt to avoid responding to its pending motion to dismiss (see 2509170009). The amended complaint was filed earlier last week. Typically, plaintiffs get to amend their complaint once, and the third filing "flouts that rule," AT&T said. The company is being sued for allegedly having made “materially false and misleading statements” about its ownership of legacy telecom cables with toxic lead.
A second amended class-action complaint about AT&T ownership of legacy telecom cables laden with toxic lead (see 2311270004) still hasn't alleged enough facts to show that the company knowingly acted wrongly or with an intent to deceive, according to the company. In a motion to dismiss filed with the U.S. District Court for Northern Texas (docket 3:24-cv-01196), AT&T said the plaintiffs ignore the fact that more than two years after Wall Street Journal articles about the old telecom infrastructure and its environmental risks, which prompted the litigation, "none of those purported risks has come to fruition." The plaintiffs also haven't adequately pleaded actionable falsity for any alleged misstatement or omission, AT&T added.
Representatives of the Ecommerce Innovation Alliance met with an aide to Chairman Brendan Carr on the group’s pursuit of a declaratory ruling finding that people who provide prior express written consent to receive text messages can't claim damages under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for those received outside the hours of 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. (see 2503030036).
Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) and its top executives were engaged in "straightforward ... securities fraud" when they concealed from investors how important NBA rights were to its revenues, class-action plaintiffs said Monday as they opposed the company's motion to dismiss their suit. While WBD argues that the market already knew the value of the NBA rights, the matching clause terms in its contract with the NBA was less "potent" than the company had made it out to be in public statements, the plaintiffs said. WBD CEO David Zaslav and CFO Gunnar Wiedenfels are also defendants in the suit, filed in November at the U.S. District Court for Southern New York (docket 1:24-cv-09027). The plaintiffs are suing over the financial hit WBD took in 2024 when it lost NBA rights to Amazon.
Telephone Consumer Protection Act and marketing lawyers see Friday's U.S. Supreme Court decision on the deference that lower courts are to give the FCC over telemarketing issues (see 2506200053) as potentially resetting decades of TCPA precedence by the agency.
The Nebraska attorney general filed a lawsuit against online marketplace Temu on Thursday, alleging privacy and consumer protection violations. The state seeks to stop Temu from collecting, maintaining and using consumers' personally identifiable information (PII).
The company challenging Hobbs Act limits on lower court review of an FCC decision in a Telephone Consumer Protection Act case told the U.S. Supreme Court the government and its supporters are seeking “a strikingly broad reading” of the act. SCOTUS is scheduled to hear McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates v. McKesson Jan. 21, a case from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Four major trade associations urged that the U.S. Supreme Court reject arguments that a lower court can review an FCC decision in a Telephone Consumer Protection Act case and isn’t barred from doing so under the Hobbs Act. That view largely supports U.S. government arguments on the important role the act plays (see 2412240022). SCOTUS is scheduled to hear McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates v. McKesson Jan. 21, a case from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The U.S. government, in an amicus brief filed Monday, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reject arguments that a lower court can parse an FCC decision in a Telephone Consumer Protection Act case and isn’t barred from doing so under the Hobbs Act. SCOTUS will hear McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates v. McKesson Jan. 21, a case from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court's dismissal of a proposed class action suit that alleged Intelsat's then-chairman and two investor groups participated in insider trading (see 2304270005). In a docket 23-15822 order Wednesday, the appellate court said plaintiff Walleye hedge funds didn't adequately prove that David McGlade, Silver Lake Group and BC Partners possessed material nonpublic information. The three-judge panel said the Walleye funds also didn't adequately plead that Silver Lake and BC knew about Intelsat meeting with the FCC in November 2019 regarding the pending C-band clearing before the two funds sold big blocks of Intelsat shares. Walleye alleged the funds knew the FCC was leaning toward a public auction of the spectrum, and the FCC's subsequent announcement resulted in a big drop in Intelsat's stock price. Deciding were Judges Milan Smith, Andrew Hurwitz and Anthony Johnstone, with Smith penning the order.