The American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League, in separate amicus briefs Thursday before the U.S. Supreme Court, came to the defense of NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association in their efforts to defeat the Texas and Florida social media laws (dockets 22-277 and 22-555) on grounds that their content-moderation and other restrictions violate the First Amendment.
The FTC's appeal of the district court’s July 11 denial of its motion for a preliminary injunction to block Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard buy (see 2307110031) “is every bit about the right process for merger review as it is about the denial of relief,” FTC attorney Imad Abyad told the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in oral argument Wednesday.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports T-Mobile’s Nov. 28 motion to certify the court’s Nov. 2 denial of T-Mobile’s motion to dismiss the T-Mobile/Sprint antitrust class action for interlocutory appeal to the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (see 2311290042), said the Chamber’s amicus brief Wednesday (docket 1:22-cv-03189) in U.S. District Court for Northern Illinois in Chicago.
The November 2022 ruling in the U.S. District Court for Eastern Virginia granting T-Mobile summary judgment over its rights to use the Simply Prepaid trademark in commercial activity on grounds that Simply Wireless had abandoned it (see 2211250016) was “unprecedented,” Simply Wireless’ counsel, Robert Litowitz of Kelly IP, told the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in oral argument Wednesday. Simply Wireless is asking the 4th Circuit to reverse the summary judgment decision and remand the case to the district court for a jury trial to win back its rights to Simply Prepaid as an “established common law” trademark, said Litowitz. “We’ve looked for a case finding summary judgment on these facts” but were unable to find one, said Litowitz. “Simply Wireless should be permitted to have a jury decide whether this valuable trademark, which it had used successfully,” belongs to Simply Wireless, he said. “Simply Wireless used Simply Prepaid very effectively, and it was known in the industry,” said Litowitz. When T-Mobile announced it was opening 500 Simply Prepaid retail stores, the then-CEO of Simply Wireless got calls from Sprint, falsely congratulating him for having sold the Simply Prepaid trademark to T-Mobile, he said. The owners of Simply Wireless “are shrewd, they’re savvy, they’re sophisticated,” but in 2012, “they were not clairvoyant,” he said. “They could not have dreamed that their former partner, T-Mobile, would take a Simply brand and use it,” he said. The district court's decision “should be affirmed on either of two grounds,” that Simply Wireless abandoned use of Simply Prepaid, a the lower court found, or that it was guilty of “no continuous use” of the trademark, countered T-Mobile attorney Joseph Mueller of WilmerHale. “The issue with abandonment is actually quite narrow,” said Mueller. “There’s no challenge to the district court findings” that Simply Wireless’ activities that began in July 2012 to rejuvenate its use of Simply Prepaid “were insufficient to create a new protectable interest in the Simply Prepaid mark,” he said. If the 4th Circuit were to uphold the district court’s analysis, and conclude that there was “no intent” by Simply Wireless to renew use of Simply Prepaid during the three-year “gap period” between 2009 and 2011 in which Simply Prepaid was dormant, “the case would end,” said Mueller.
The First Amendment guarantees virtually insurmountable protection for a private entity’s expressive decision to share, or not to share, another speaker’s lawful expression with their own audience, said an amicus brief Tuesday at the U.S. Supreme Court from the American Civil Liberties Union, the Motion Picture Association and six other groups in support of NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association and their efforts to defeat the Texas and Florida social media laws.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) and the Daily Wire and Federalist media outlets seek declaratory and injunctive relief to stop the State Department from running “one of the most egregious government operations to censor the American press” in the history of the U.S., said their complaint Wednesday (docket 6:23-cv-00609) in U.S. District Court for Eastern Texas in Tyler. The complaint draws heavily from documents produced in discovery in Missouri v. Biden.
Defendant Zachary Lotz, who also goes by the aliases Lao Ganma and Sam Hill, “has repeatedly harassed, and continues to harass, Shopify merchants and Shopify itself through knowingly false allegations of copyright infringement,” alleged Shopify’s Digital Millennium Copyright Act complaint Monday (docket 1:23-cv-01254) in U.S. District Court for Western New York in Buffalo.
Verizon seeks a preliminary injunction, pending trial on the merits of its claims in the case, ordering the city of Milwaukee “to issue permits and all necessary permissions” for the installation of small-cell wireless communications facilities in the city’s Deer District (see 2311270034), said its motion Monday (docket 2:23-cv-01581) in U.S. District Court for Eastern Wisconsin in Milwaukee.
The U.S. District Court for Southern Indiana in Indianapolis should dismiss the suit challenging the constitutionality of Indiana’s “buffer law” for lack of jurisdiction because the media organizations that brought the action Oct. 6 have alleged no facts sufficient to establish standing or ripeness, said Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita (R) and his two co-defendants in their motion Friday (docket 1:23-cv-01805).
AT&T seeks declaratory and injunctive relief challenging a Washington city's denial of its application for a conditional use permit to build, operate and maintain a wireless telecommunication facility consisting of a 65-foot “faux tree” and accessory equipment on church property on the Walla Walla’s east side, said its complaint Friday (docket 4:23-cv-05162) in U.S. District Court for Eastern Washington in Richland.