The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld dismissal of a claim by Daredevil against ZTE, after a Florida arbiter addressed a lawsuit charging “breach of contract, fraud, and unjust enrichment.” Daredevil had sued subsidiary ZTE USA in Florida and an “arbitrator ultimately denied each of Daredevil’s claims,” said an order posted Friday in docket 19-3769. Daredevil then reopened the case in the Eastern District of Missouri, which was denied by a lower court citing the Florida arbitration. “The district court correctly concluded that claim preclusion applies here,” the 8th circuit ruled: “Daredevil’s current and previous claims share identity of the parties and identity of the cause of action.” ZTE didn’t comment. Daredevil had contracted with ZTE in several areas to provide gear and technology as it sought to build a wireless network, but over time “the parties’ business relationship broke down,” which led to allegations of “breach of contract, rescission, and unjust enrichment,” the court said. Deredevil alleged that because of ZTE's action in Missouri, it couldn't develop the St. Louis market.

Aviation and aerospace industry representatives answered FCC engineering staff questions on “methods of testing and analysis” used in a multistakeholder group report on interference risks to low-range radar altimeters posed by mobile C-band use. NTIA and FCC officials were also in the discussion, with staff from the Office of Engineering and Technology and Wireless Bureau, said a Friday posting in docket 18-122. "Commission staff’s questions and resulting discussion were wide ranging.”

The FCC declined to adopt proposals by CTA and Garmin on temporary labels for RF devices that may now be imported for sale before they are authorized. Commissioners OK’d revised rules 4-0 Thursday (see 2106170051). “CTA requested clarification on the interaction between temporary labeling and e-labeling requirements and Garmin requested clarification on temporary labeling for bulk devices sealed in shipping containers or wrapping,” said the order. “Temporary label rules we adopt here are a necessary safeguard against the transfer of devices to consumers in advance of completing equipment authorization,” the order said: “Because we believe the rules we adopt today are sufficiently clear and balance flexibility for manufacturers with the important goals of the equipment authorization process, we decline to adopt here the further clarifications.” Our comparison didn’t reveal other significant changes over the draft.

In a call with an aide to FCC acting Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, CTIA urged release of more details as carriers decide whether to bid in the 3.45 GHz auction. CTIA “emphasized the critical need” for NTIA and DOD “to make available as soon as possible additional information concerning the 3.45 GHz coordination framework with more granularity,” said a filing posted Thursday in docket 19-348.

NCTA and cable operators opposed higher power levels in the citizens broadband radio service band, in calls with FCC Wireless Bureau and Office of Engineering and Technology staffers. “Raising the power levels for CBRS would fundamentally alter the nature of the service by undermining the innovative spectrum sharing concept that the Commission enabled when it adopted the CBRS framework, endangering new and innovative approaches to service delivery, inhibiting competition, and undermining auction business cases and expectations,” said a filing posted Wednesday in docket 19-348. Representatives of Charter Communications, Comcast, Cox Enterprises, Midcontinent Communications and CableLabs participated.

Commissioners approved 4-0 ahead of Thursday’s meeting an uncontroversial NPRM on rules and use of the automatic identification system for devices used to mark fishing equipment. The FY 2021 National Defense Authorization Act required the FCC to launch a proceeding on the topic by June 30. There were no ex parte filings on the draft NPRM in docket 21-230. The NPRM seeks comment “on the current types and usages of such devices,” the costs and benefits of their use on alternative spectrum, and on “how best to categorize devices used to mark fishing equipment and protect incumbents through technical and operational limitations.” Comment deadlines will come in the Federal Register.

The FCC Wednesday announced post-rebanding availability of 800 MHz channels in all National Public Safety Planning Advisory Committee regions. The Wireless and Public Safety bureaus listed 14 regions where rebanding is “newly complete” and counties on the U.S-Mexico border region where the freeze is now lifted. In the newly opened regions, “channels in the interleaved segment of the band that have been vacated by Sprint … are now available for licensing to public safety entities and, later, to critical infrastructure entities,” the notice said: “Unoccupied channels in the Expansion Band and Guard Band are available for licensing.” Commissioners approved an 4-0 order in April finding rebanding is complete (see 2104220056). “It's been a long time coming, but we are generally pleased with this decision since rebanding … had been completed for a while,” emailed Mark Crosby, president of the Enterprise Wireless Alliance.

ATIS told the FCC it’s developing guidance for wireless emergency alerts, responding to a September letter from then-Chairman Ajit Pai (see 2009100010). “ATIS agrees with the Commission that there is benefit” here, said a filing posted Tuesday in docket 15-91. “WEA 3.0 Operational Considerations for Commercial Mobile Service Providers” is expected to be ready for balloting in Q3, the group said. The new “document will provide additional information on the purpose of the flexible operational settings,” ATIS said.

Portland, Oregon; San Francisco and other cities urged the Supreme Court to hear their challenge to a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision upholding much of 2018 FCC small-cell orders (see 2103230052). The FCC and DOJ told SCOTUS there’s no reason to take the case (see 2106030066). “Far from being a straightforward agency statutory interpretation that Respondents claim, the Order raises significant statutory and constitutional issues,” the cities replied Tuesday in docket 20-1354. The 9th Circuit is “in conflict with other circuits and at odds with this Court’s precedent,” they said: That court adopted a “’prohibition’ standard with no limiting principle, favoring wireless provider business preferences.”

Speakers made clear at a recent New Street conference that business-to-business innovation will be important to making 5G profitable for providers, the firm's James Ratzer told investors Monday. Experts “were unanimous in the view that the pace of 5G B2B innovation has stepped up significantly, with a thousand flowers set to bloom across a huge range of vertical markets, end-user applications and value chain configurations,” he said: “This is important if 5G is to become more than just an enabler of cheap capacity at higher connection speeds.”