Minnesota asked the 8th U.S. Court of Appeals to review a panel's 2-1 ruling affirming a district court decision that state regulation of interconnected VoIP was pre-empted as an information service, in Charter v. Nancy Lange, No. 17-2290 (see 1809070030). The majority ruling is "inconsistent" with the Telecom Act, and "in conflict" with prior 8th Circuit opinions on USF contributions and Vonage's VoIP service and the Supreme Court's cable modem Brand X ruling, petitioned (in Pacer) the Minnesota Office of Attorney General Friday, on behalf of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, seeking en banc or panel rehearing: "Consideration by the full Court is necessary to ensure uniformity of this Court's decisions." Charter Phone "is a fixed, interconnected VoIP service with the ability to determine whether calls are interstate or intrastate," Minnesota said. "Under the plain terms of this Court's Vonage III ruling and Paragraph 56 of the FCC's USF Order quoted therein, the MPUC has jurisdiction over Charter Phone." It also cited a 2017 8th Circuit ruling upholding a district court decision relying on that USF language as applied in Vonage III "observing that the FCC explicitly said that the Vonage preemption order does not apply to providers with the ability to track the jurisdiction of customer calls and such providers are subject to state regulation." Pillsbury Winthrop's Glenn Richards, representing the Voice on the Net Coalition, which backed Charter, emailed he's "disappointed, but not surprised" by the petition: "I don’t see any issues raised in the petition that are likely to result in a different decision by the full court.” Charter Communications didn't comment Monday.

Minnesota asked the 8th U.S. Court of Appeals to review a panel's 2-1 ruling affirming a district court decision that state regulation of interconnected VoIP was pre-empted as an information service, in Charter v. Nancy Lange, No. 17-2290 (see 1809070030). The majority ruling is "inconsistent" with the Telecom Act, and "in conflict" with prior 8th Circuit opinions on USF contributions and Vonage's VoIP service and the Supreme Court's cable modem Brand X ruling, petitioned (in Pacer) the Minnesota Office of Attorney General Friday, on behalf of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, seeking en banc or panel rehearing: "Consideration by the full Court is necessary to ensure uniformity of this Court's decisions." Charter Phone "is a fixed, interconnected VoIP service with the ability to determine whether calls are interstate or intrastate," Minnesota said. "Under the plain terms of this Court's Vonage III ruling and Paragraph 56 of the FCC's USF Order quoted therein, the MPUC has jurisdiction over Charter Phone." It also cited a 2017 8th Circuit ruling upholding a district court decision relying on that USF language as applied in Vonage III "observing that the FCC explicitly said that the Vonage preemption order does not apply to providers with the ability to track the jurisdiction of customer calls and such providers are subject to state regulation." Pillsbury Winthrop's Glenn Richards, representing the Voice on the Net Coalition, which backed Charter, emailed he's "disappointed, but not surprised" by the petition: "I don’t see any issues raised in the petition that are likely to result in a different decision by the full court.” Charter Communications didn't comment Monday.

The launch of long-anticipated sharing in the 3.5 GHz citizens broadband radio service band could be slowed by interagency conflicts, industry and government officials told us. Use of the band depends in particular on Navy cooperation, but questions were said to have been raised within the powerful Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee. IRAC looks after the interests of government spectrum managers. NTIA and DOD didn’t comment Monday.

FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel declined to say Thursday whether she will vote for the pending 5G wireless infrastructure order and declaratory ruling at the Wednesday commissioners' meeting, and she expressed strong reservations. Rosenworcel also said at a Politico 5G discussion that U.S. tariffs against China are going be harmful to 5G. Commissioner Brendan Carr, the architect of the 5G order, defended the action the FCC is poised to take next week.

FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel declined to say Thursday whether she will vote for the pending 5G wireless infrastructure order and declaratory ruling at the Wednesday commissioners' meeting, and she expressed strong reservations. Rosenworcel also said at a Politico 5G discussion that U.S. tariffs against China are going be harmful to 5G. Commissioner Brendan Carr, the architect of the 5G order, defended the action the FCC is poised to take next week.

The FCC Office of General Counsel rejected an appeal of its response to a Freedom of Information Act request for not citing any particular errors, according to a dismissal on delegated authority in Wednesday's Daily Digest. Ryan Shapiro, an attorney with transparency group Property of the People requested records of payments to or from “Trump-related Properties” and the FCC responded with unredacted records that consisted primarily of regulatory fees, the dismissal said. Shapiro appealed the response and questioned the adequacy of the search, but didn’t identify specific issues, the filing said: “You stated that you wished to continue with your appeal as it is [your] general practice to administratively appeal such matters for the sake of thoroughness. ... We conclude that you have not raised any material issues with the response to your FOIA request that would merit review by the Commission.” Property of the People didn’t comment.

The wireless infrastructure declaratory ruling and order, set for a vote Sept. 26, could sail through the FCC 4-0, though Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel is still considered a wildcard, industry and FCC officials said. Meanwhile, Commissioner Mike O’Rielly will support the order, but potentially with concerns on whether it goes far enough. New York City and Los Angeles County raised late concerns.

The wireless infrastructure declaratory ruling and order, set for a vote Sept. 26, could sail through the FCC 4-0, though Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel is still considered a wildcard, industry and FCC officials said. Meanwhile, Commissioner Mike O’Rielly will support the order, but potentially with concerns on whether it goes far enough. New York City and Los Angeles County raised late concerns.

The pace of broadband progress and how it's measured sparked further divisions on the FCC Telecom Act Section 706 inquiry into whether advanced telecom capability (ATC) is being deployed in a reasonable and timely way. Many comments were posted Tuesday in docket 18-238, including over fixed and mobile service distinctions (see 1809170044). Telco and cable incumbents generally said broadband-like ATC is being rolled out adequately, and 5G wireless will bring new advances. Rivals and others cited shortcomings and urged the agency to increase its ATC speed benchmark. The FCC's last 706 report made a positive ATC determination, kept a 25/3 Mbps fixed benchmark and concluded mobile isn't a full substitute for fixed (see 1802050002). Broadband investment and deployment are robust, in part due to light-touch regulation, commented USTelecom. AT&T and Verizon also hailed ATC buildout. AT&T said "mobile broadband is a functional substitute for fixed broadband," and Verizon said providers "stand at the precipice of game-changing 5G network deployments." CTIA called mobile broadband deployment reasonable and timely. NCTA and the American Cable Association urged a positive ATC determination, and they, ITTA, the Wireless ISP Association, Adtran and others backed maintaining the 25/3 Mbps fixed standard. Despite the progress, incumbents said the regulator could do more to spur broadband, but Common Cause and Public Knowledge said recent FCC actions "widened the digital divide." The Communications Workers of America said the pace of broadband deployment isn't reasonable and timely, with more than 24 million Americans lacking access and more lacking high-speed wired connections. Incompas said it's "time to be bold" and raise the benchmark to 1 Gbps, while CWA and others backed 100 Mbps. CWA, Incompas, WISPA, ITTA, rural groups and others said mobile isn't an adequate substitute for fixed. NTCA said only existing, not possible future, services should determine the ATC finding. The Fiber Broadband Association urged a focus on "all-fiber connectivity" and a "holistic approach" factoring in service reliability and latency. ViaSat and SES Americom plugged satellite broadband. New America's Open Technology Institute, Microsoft and others said Form 477 broadband data is flawed and sought fixes and use of other sources. Free Press urged inclusion of data from Puerto Rico and other storm-struck areas and said the FCC should "abandon" proposals to "gut" Lifeline USF. The National Digital Inclusion Alliance cited broadband adoption and affordability as critical and voiced concern about "evidence of AT&T's digital redlining."

The pace of broadband progress and how it's measured sparked further divisions on the FCC Telecom Act Section 706 inquiry into whether advanced telecom capability (ATC) is being deployed in a reasonable and timely way. Many comments were posted Tuesday in docket 18-238, including over fixed and mobile service distinctions (see 1809170044). Telco and cable incumbents generally said broadband-like ATC is being rolled out adequately, and 5G wireless will bring new advances. Rivals and others cited shortcomings and urged the agency to increase its ATC speed benchmark. The FCC's last 706 report made a positive ATC determination, kept a 25/3 Mbps fixed benchmark and concluded mobile isn't a full substitute for fixed (see 1802050002). Broadband investment and deployment are robust, in part due to light-touch regulation, commented USTelecom. AT&T and Verizon also hailed ATC buildout. AT&T said "mobile broadband is a functional substitute for fixed broadband," and Verizon said providers "stand at the precipice of game-changing 5G network deployments." CTIA called mobile broadband deployment reasonable and timely. NCTA and the American Cable Association urged a positive ATC determination, and they, ITTA, the Wireless ISP Association, Adtran and others backed maintaining the 25/3 Mbps fixed standard. Despite the progress, incumbents said the regulator could do more to spur broadband, but Common Cause and Public Knowledge said recent FCC actions "widened the digital divide." The Communications Workers of America said the pace of broadband deployment isn't reasonable and timely, with more than 24 million Americans lacking access and more lacking high-speed wired connections. Incompas said it's "time to be bold" and raise the benchmark to 1 Gbps, while CWA and others backed 100 Mbps. CWA, Incompas, WISPA, ITTA, rural groups and others said mobile isn't an adequate substitute for fixed. NTCA said only existing, not possible future, services should determine the ATC finding. The Fiber Broadband Association urged a focus on "all-fiber connectivity" and a "holistic approach" factoring in service reliability and latency. ViaSat and SES Americom plugged satellite broadband. New America's Open Technology Institute, Microsoft and others said Form 477 broadband data is flawed and sought fixes and use of other sources. Free Press urged inclusion of data from Puerto Rico and other storm-struck areas and said the FCC should "abandon" proposals to "gut" Lifeline USF. The National Digital Inclusion Alliance cited broadband adoption and affordability as critical and voiced concern about "evidence of AT&T's digital redlining."