In the Jan. 20 issue of the CBP Customs Bulletin (Vol. 50, Nos. 2 and 3) (here), CBP published notices that propose to revoke or modify rulings and similar treatment for clutch master cylinders and clutch slave cylinders, and parts of front differential and rear differential assemblies for motor vehicles.
A three-judge U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit panel focused on whether to rule on whether country code top-level domains (ccTLDs) can be considered attachable property for garnishment purposes or on the bigger issue of whether ccTLDs can be considered the property of national governments at all in claims brought under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), during oral argument Thursday in Weinstein v. Islamic Republic of Iran. The D.C. Circuit is reviewing Judge Royce Lamberth’s 2014 district court decision on Weinstein and six similar cases involving attempts to garnish ownership of the ccTLDs for Iran, North Korea and Syria as partial damages compensation following successful lawsuits against those nations’ governments (see 1601200063 and 1411130055). Lamberth didn’t rule in 2014 on whether a ccTLD could be considered government property. D.C. Circuit Judges Merrick Garland and Raymond Randolph actively questioned the merits of Weinstein while Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson observed.
The Supreme Court could eventually review USF False Claim Act (FCA) litigation, a lawyer in one of the cases said at an FCBA seminar Wednesday. Vinson & Elkins attorney Jeremy Marwell said fraud allegations against recipients of USF support don’t qualify under the FCA, but he acknowledged it’s a “close question,” particularly in light of mixed court rulings to date. While Marwell was on the winning side of a July 2014 E-rate decision by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled the FCA doesn’t apply to USF programs (United States ex rel. Shupe v. Cisco, No. 13-40807), other cases are pending in the 7th Circuit and D.C. Circuit, which could create a circuit split. Marwell said he “wouldn’t be surprised” if the cases go to the high court.
A new coalition of companies, public interest groups and trade associations is promising Capitol Hill lobbying, consumer outreach and a host of other steps to block Charter Communications' proposed buy of Bright House Networks and Time Warner Cable. A similar Stop Mega Comcast coalition launched in 2014 in opposition to Comcast's now-dead attempt at buying TWC, and many of the same members are part of the Stop Mega Cable Coalition announced Thursday.
A three-judge U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit panel focused on whether to rule on whether country code top-level domains (ccTLDs) can be considered attachable property for garnishment purposes or on the bigger issue of whether ccTLDs can be considered the property of national governments at all in claims brought under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), during oral argument Thursday in Weinstein v. Islamic Republic of Iran. The D.C. Circuit is reviewing Judge Royce Lamberth’s 2014 district court decision on Weinstein and six similar cases involving attempts to garnish ownership of the ccTLDs for Iran, North Korea and Syria as partial damages compensation following successful lawsuits against those nations’ governments (see 1601200063 and 1411130055). Lamberth didn’t rule in 2014 on whether a ccTLD could be considered government property. D.C. Circuit Judges Merrick Garland and Raymond Randolph actively questioned the merits of Weinstein while Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson observed.
A new coalition of companies, public interest groups and trade associations is promising Capitol Hill lobbying, consumer outreach and a host of other steps to block Charter Communications' proposed buy of Bright House Networks and Time Warner Cable. A similar Stop Mega Comcast coalition launched in 2014 in opposition to Comcast's now-dead attempt at buying TWC, and many of the same members are part of the Stop Mega Cable Coalition announced Thursday.
TechFreedom joined a coalition of more than 40 U.S. organizations in sending a letter (here) Jan. 21 urging Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Ill., support a permanent prohibition on Internet access taxes. Despite its omission from the House and Senate versions of customs reauthorization legislation, the Internet Tax Freedom Act (ITFA), which bars states from levying taxes on Internet access and e-commerce, was inserted in the final conference report of the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act (TFTA). “Our organizations have a variety of missions and represent Americans from all walks of life and on all sides of the political spectrum, and it’s very rare that we agree on policy or work together in a unified manner,” the letter states. “But this issue is different. We support ITFA because it’s a permanent ban on taxing access to the Internet is critical to all Americans and the future of our overall economy.
Charter Communications' planned buys of Bright House Networks and Time Warner Cable aren't in the public interest, based on the information Charter provided, the California Public Utilities Commission Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA) said in reply testimony. Groups representing minorities don’t believe approving the deals would be in the public interest because they would create one company with too much power over broadband opportunities. The CPUC received reply testimony Friday from interveners in the state-level proceeding. The next step is a public hearing Tuesday at 6 p.m. PST, presided over by an administrative law judge. No action is planned until all public comments are heard.
Charter Communications' planned buys of Bright House Networks and Time Warner Cable aren't in the public interest, based on the information Charter provided, the California Public Utilities Commission Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA) said in reply testimony. Groups representing minorities don’t believe approving the deals would be in the public interest because they would create one company with too much power over broadband opportunities. The CPUC received reply testimony Friday from interveners in the state-level proceeding. The next step is a public hearing Tuesday at 6 p.m. PST, presided over by an administrative law judge. No action is planned until all public comments are heard.
The FCC has been summoning for meetings industry entities associated with set-top boxes and the Downloadable Security Technology Advisory Committee, said industry officials and a series of ex parte filings. Groups pushing for a rulemaking to come out of the DSTAC's report are pushing to get an item on the agenda of an FCC meeting, while multichannel video programming distributors and others opposed to the FCC's acting on the report are trying to keep the rulemaking process from proceeding, an attorney following the DSTAC process told us.