With Thursday the deadline for states to opt out of FirstNet, the authority and AT&T got an opt-in notice from the District of Columbia. That makes 48 states and territories to opt in. Oregon and Washington state said yes on Tuesday (see 1712260035). New Hampshire is the only state to say it would opt out, but opt-in arguments for that state haven’t subsided (see 1712200043). Still unannounced are California, Florida, Mississippi and New York, plus the three Pacific territories, which have until March 12 to decide.

VTDigger wants to appeal a district court decision that FirstNet is exempt from Freedom of Information Act requests (see 1712200043), the local news organization said in a Friday memo (in Pacer) to the U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont in Burlington. VTDigger asked the district court to certify interlocutory appeal of its order to the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

ITTA said the FCC shouldn't require nationwide number portability (NNP) of mobile and traditional wireline numbers. Comments are due Thursday on an NPRM and notice of inquiry on NNP (see 1710240062), but ITTA filed early. “While the Commission’s aims are laudable, the realities of implementing NNP may, for many carriers, cause more harm than yield competitive benefits,” ITTA said “Furthermore, carriers will be forced to pass along implementation costs to consumers, which, in turn, dilutes the consumer benefits of NNP. ITTA cautions the Commission to keep this in mind as it evaluates the record in response to its proposal to implement NNP.” NNP would force carriers to upgrade their equipment, but the money would be better spent on transitioning to IP-based networks, ITTA said.

FirstNet got opt-ins from Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts and North Dakota Friday (see here, here, here and here). The decisions make 45 of 56 states and territories to opt in, and come after Rivada urged all states to opt out in protest of a late FirstNet change to its draft spectrum manager lease agreement (see 1712210039). The deadline to opt out is Thursday.

AT&T and Time Warner again agreed to push back the termination date of AT&T's buy of TW. In an SEC filing Thursday, AT&T said it and TW agreed to move the date to June 21, from April 22. The two previously agreed to move the date by six months (see 1711280063). The trial in the DOJ suit seeking to block AT&T/TW is scheduled to start March 19 and run an estimated 15 days (see 1712070067).

The FCC International and Wireless bureaus and Office of Engineering and Technology published procedures for registering fixed satellite service earth stations entitled to protection from the 3.5 GHz citizens broadband radio service. The Thursday public notice -- stemming from the 2016 report and order on the shared band (see 1605020059) -- detailed eligibility requirements for earth stations entitled to protection and gave an overview of the registration process.

President Donald Trump’s comments questioning the “licenses” of media outlets are mostly “bravado,” NAB President Gordon Smith said in an interview with C-SPAN’s The Communicators that will be shown Saturday (see 1710110075). Smith said he's not worried the FCC will try to penalize media outlets over their content. Chairman Ajit Pai is “totally committed” to the First Amendment, Smith said. He also said he believes statements by FCC commissioners that broadcasters who miss their post-incentive auction repacking deadlines won’t be kicked off the air, but he said broadcasters will need Congress to provide additional repacking reimbursement funds. Broadcasters “have a lot to be thankful for” in the recent federal tax reform bill, especially since it doesn’t include proposed provisions that would have removed deductions for advertising revenue. Since broadcasters get most of their income from advertising, such a rule change would be a “real and present danger” to the industry, Smith said. A Microsoft push to have vacant channels in the TV band set aside for unlicensed use is “premature,” Smith said, and shouldn’t be taken up until after the repacking is complete. The NAB head declined to take a position on whether the FCC has the authority to change the national ownership cap, saying the association’s members are still debating the matter. Some elements of NAB support leaving the cap alone, while others want the limit raised or eliminated, Smith said. He also didn’t take a position on the pending Sinclair/Tribune merger, or net neutrality rules. NAB is “neutral on net neutrality,” he said.

A court dispatched two cases involving FCC inmate calling service rate orders in light of litigant motions and a third commission order that was substantially overturned by the court. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit dismissed as moot challenges to a 2013 ICS order that set interim interstate rate caps, saying all parties agree the order "has been superseded by a subsequent agency order," said an order (in Pacer) of a three-judge panel Thursday in Securus Technologies v. FCC, No. 13-1280. It was referring to a 2015 order setting permanent interstate and intrastate rate limits. In Global Tel*Link v. FCC, No. 15-1461, the D.C. Circuit in June struck down much of that order, including the FCC's intrastate pricing authority, and upheld the agency's interstate pricing authority, but found the regulatory methodology "patently unreasonable" and remanded related decisions for further consideration (see 1706130047). The same panel issued a second order (in Pacer) Thursday that "summarily vacated insofar as it purports to set rate caps" a 2016 FCC reconsideration order that adjusted rate caps, noting all parties agreed they were "premised on the same legal framework and mathematical methodology that this court rejected" in Global Tel*Link. The panel remanded the rest of the recon order to the FCC for further consideration "in light of the disposition of this case" (Securus Technologies v. FCC, No. 16-1321) and the related cases.

Sinclair’s proposed buy of Tribune is a threat to competitive wireless carriers, the Competitive Carriers Association said in a series of meetings at the FCC. “CCA described the concrete, transaction-specific injuries to mobile broadband competition that would ensue if the transaction were approved,” said a filing in docket 17-179. “Sinclair has a demonstrable incentive to exploit its position as a 600 MHz incumbent to deny wireless carriers the nearly $20 billion worth of spectrum they have purchased unless Sinclair’s preferred ATSC 3.0 technologies are incorporated into wireless handsets.”

FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn explained "What Happens Next with Net Neutrality" Thursday, a week after she dissented from an order scrapping Title II broadband regulation under the Communications Act (see 1712140039). Without net neutrality protections, "broadband providers will be allowed to: block lawful content, throttle (slow down) lawful content, engage in paid prioritization (i.e. favor content of companies who can afford to pay), unreasonably interfere with the ability of consumers and content providers to reach one another [and] engage in unreasonable interconnection practices," her "fact sheet" said. "Broadband providers will only be required to provide limited transparency to consumers about the service they receive." The changes means "your broadband provider is in control of your online experience. You will have fewer protections online. This does not mean you will immediately see anti-consumer practices, but as the outrage and awareness fade, you will likely see providers roll out plans and features that are inconsistent with net neutrality," she said. The net neutrality repeal probably won't happen for several months because of the need for Office and Management and Budget approval of the revised transparency rules, she said. Parties can challenge the order after the text is published in the Federal Register, she added.