Portion of Patriot Act Ruled Unconstitutional: A federal court in New York enjoined the FBI from issuing "National Security Letters" ("NSLs") and enforcing "gag orders" preventing the targets from discussing the NSL contents. The government has 90 days to appeal.
Vonage and Sprint Patent Case Continues: In addition to the well-publicized Verizon v. Vonage patent case currently under appeal, Vonage is also fending off a patent lawsuit brought by Sprint Nextel. That case involves 19 claims brought by Sprint against Vonage alleging patent infringement. In this case, Vonage could benefit from recent Supreme Court rulings limiting the breadth of certain types of patents. Vonage is waiting on a ruling from the appellate court in the Verizon case.
Court Rules for Verizon in Northeast 271 UNE case: The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Maine and New Hampshire PUCs do not have the authority to set rates for Section 271 UNEs. The New Hampshire PUC attempted to set rates on UNEs delisted from 251 but still covered by 271 of the Telecom Act. Similarly, using a state law as the foundation, the Maine PUC sought to impose intrastate tariffing requirements on Verizon for Section 271 UNEs and prove that the rates were reasonable. The court found in favor of Verizon holding that the states may not impose pricing restrictions.
DSL Antitrust Case Continues on in California: Almost five years ago, a group of ISPs filed a lawsuit against then SBC (now AT&T) arguing that its provision of DSL to ISPs violated antitrust laws. AT&T attempted to use the Supreme Court's 2004 Trinko decision to eliminate the price squeeze allegations from the pending lawsuit. In a split ruling, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that Trinko does not eliminate the viability of price squeeze claims.
Sprint Settles for $30 Million to Settle USF Case: Sprint agreed to settle a lawsuit alleging that Sprint overcharged long distance consumers for universal service from 2001 through 2003. The complaint alleged that Sprint conspired with MCI, its main long distance competitor at the time, to charge and collect more than the federally-mandated USF quarterly contribution. AT&T is a defendant in this case as well, but has not agreed to a settlement.
Comments