Trade groups and companies that favor spectrum aggregation limits in the incentive auction of broadcast TV spectrum met with Louis Peraertz, aide to acting FCC Chairwoman Mignon Clyburn and Jessica Almond, chief of staff at the Wireless Bureau, to press their case. “This group of public interest organizations, trade associations, and competitive carriers discussed the attached slides [http://bit.ly/1aUXQXU], which explain the importance of promoting competition and preventing excessive spectrum aggregation in the upcoming 600 MHz incentive auction,” said a Friday ex parte filing (http://bit.ly/17Iax9F). “Adopting a spectrum aggregation limit for this auction will promote investment and innovation, encourage auction participation, enhance consumer choice, and create the potential for higher auction revenue.” Among the groups represented were the Competitive Carriers Association, Rural Telecommunications Group, NTCA, New America Foundation and the Computer & Communications Industry Association. Carriers represented included Sprint, T-Mobile, U.S. Cellular and C Spire Wireless. Dish Network also had a representative at the meeting.
CBP said it's working on revising its regulations to centralize and automate its single transaction bond process, said Paula Connelly, a trade lawyer based in Burlington, Mass. Connelly attended a June 27 meeting on the single transaction bond process at the Port of Boston, which officials said is one of a series of CBP port visits to gather feedback from the trade on its plan to centralize the STB process. Bruce Ingalls, director of CBP’s Revenue Division, hopes to see implementation of the centralized system by the summer of 2014, Connelly said.
Beta carotene tablets imported by Roche Vitamins are correctly classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule as provitamins, said the Court of International Trade, ruling against CBP’s proposed classification as food preparations. The case had been subject to an earlier ruling in 2010, where the court found factual disputes still existed as to the use of the tablets, and ordered a trial. After trial, CIT found the tablets are predominantly used as a source of provitamin A.
The FCC’s indecency rules are too vague to survive court challenges or provide a clear definition of what constitutes a violation, said a host of filings from trade associations, broadcasters, affiliates and public interest groups on Wednesday,the deadline for comments on the commission’s indecency public notice. The Family Research Council said the commission has never defined “egregious,” while the Radio Television Digital News Association said the commission’s indecency policy is “unknown and unknowable to broadcasters, journalists, and program producers alike.” The commission must “step back from substituting its own editorial and artistic judgment for that of broadcasters and the creative community,” NAB said. “The Commission should decline to act absent a significant abuse of discretion."
The Federal Maritime Commission released a notice of the filing of the following agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may submit comments on the agreement to the Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within 10 days.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the dismissal of a test case on gender and age discrimination by Harmonized Tariff Schedule provisions for footwear and apparel. Rack Room, Skiz Imports, and Forever 21 argued that different duty rates for men’s, women’s and children’s footwear and apparel violate the equal protection clause of the constitution. According to the appeals court ruling, the outcome of 171 lawsuits depended on the result of this test case. As had the Court of International Trade in 2012, CAFC decided the companies failed to demonstrate Congressional intent to discriminate, and so failed to prove a violation of the equal protection clause.
A three-judge U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit panel ruled Friday that the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) must hear a patent case pitting InterDigital Communications against LG Electronics; the ruling overturned the ITC’s earlier decision that the companies enter into arbitration over the dispute, which the Federal Circuit’s majority opinion called “wholly groundless.” InterDigital had filed a complaint with the ITC in 2011 claiming multiple companies, including LG, were infringing its patents on 3G wireless technology; the ITC agreed with LG’s argument that an expired patent licensing agreement between InterDigital and LG required the companies to use an arbitrator. The Federal Circuit ruled that since the licensing agreement between the companies had expired, LG no longer held a license for the 3G technology and therefore could not use the agreement to justify the ITC’s decision. The ITC and LG claimed the Federal Circuit did not have jurisdiction because it could only decide cases involving the ITC where there was a final determination. That was an “overly restrictive” description of the court’s jurisdiction, Judge Sharon Prost wrote in her majority opinion. Judge William Bryson joined the majority opinion. Judge Alan Lourie said in a dissenting opinion that while he agreed with the majority that LG’s argument for arbitration lacked merit, he did not feel the court had jurisdiction (http://1.usa.gov/195P4H6). An ITC spokeswoman declined comment, noting that the agency doesn’t discuss matters under litigation. An InterDigital spokesman also declined to comment. LG did not respond to a request for comment.
A three-judge U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit panel ruled Friday that the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) must hear a patent case pitting InterDigital Communications against LG Electronics; the ruling overturned the ITC’s earlier decision that the companies enter into arbitration over the dispute, which the Federal Circuit’s majority opinion called “wholly groundless.” InterDigital had filed a complaint with the ITC in 2011 claiming multiple companies, including LG, were infringing its patents on 3G wireless technology; the ITC agreed with LG’s argument that an expired patent licensing agreement between InterDigital and LG required the companies to use an arbitrator. The Federal Circuit ruled that since the licensing agreement between the companies had expired, LG no longer held a license for the 3G technology and therefore could not use the agreement to justify the ITC’s decision. The ITC and LG claimed the Federal Circuit did not have jurisdiction because it could only decide cases involving the ITC where there was a final determination. That was an “overly restrictive” description of the court’s jurisdiction, Judge Sharon Prost wrote in her majority opinion. Judge William Bryson joined the majority opinion. Judge Alan Lourie said in a dissenting opinion that while he agreed with the majority that LG’s argument for arbitration lacked merit, he did not feel the court had jurisdiction (http://1.usa.gov/195P4H6). An ITC spokeswoman declined comment, noting that the agency doesn’t discuss matters under litigation. An InterDigital spokesman also declined to comment. LG did not respond to a request for comment.
A three-judge U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit panel ruled Friday that the U.S. International Trade Commission must hear a patent case pitting InterDigital Communications against LG Electronics; the ruling overturned the ITC’s earlier decision that the companies enter into arbitration over the dispute, which the Federal Circuit’s majority opinion called “wholly groundless.” InterDigital had filed a complaint with the ITC in 2011 claiming multiple companies, including LG, were infringing its patents on 3G wireless technology; the ITC agreed with LG’s argument that an expired patent licensing agreement between InterDigital and LG required the companies to use an arbitrator. The Federal Circuit ruled that since the licensing agreement between the companies had expired, LG no longer held a license for the 3G technology and therefore could not use the agreement to justify the ITC’s decision. The ITC and LG claimed the Federal Circuit did not have jurisdiction because it could only decide cases involving the ITC where there was a final determination. That was an “overly restrictive” description of the court’s jurisdiction, Judge Sharon Prost wrote in her majority opinion. Judge William Bryson joined the majority opinion. Judge Alan Lourie said in a dissenting opinion that while he agreed with the majority that LG’s argument for arbitration lacked merit, he did not feel the court had jurisdiction (http://1.usa.gov/195P4H6). An ITC spokeswoman declined comment, noting that the agency doesn’t discuss matters under litigation. An InterDigital spokesman also declined to comment. LG did not respond to a request for comment.
The American Association of Exporters and Importers (AAEI) expressed concern over CBP’s enforcement of the Bureau of Census’ Foreign Trade Regulations (FTR) and their compliance with mitigation guidelines in a letter while meeting with CBP officials on April 29.