In AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Rigney, 3D21-2261 (Fla. 3d DCA Sept. 6, 2023), Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal reviewed the denial of two motions for sanctions under section 57.105, Florida Statutes. In its ruling, the...more
The Seventh Circuit has recently joined the Second, Third, Sixth and Eleventh Circuits in adopting a narrow interpretation of Automatic Telephone Dialing System (ATDS) under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), one...more
Slowly but surely, the U.S. Courts of Appeal increasingly agree on how to interpret the definition of “automatic telephone dialing system” (“ATDS” or “autodialer”) in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”). On...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court dismissal, finding that a patent license implicitly licensed all parents and continuations that disclosed the same invention as the explicitly licensed...more
Paul Singer’s Elliott Management hedge fund revealed a $3.2 billion stake in AT&T and, along with it, a healthy-skepticism of the company’s 2018 purchase of Time Warner and general calls to divest as part of a 24-page letter...more
IRIDESCENT NETWORKS, INC. v. AT&T MOBILITY, LLC - Before Prost, Reyna and Taranto. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas - Iridescent sued AT&T and Ericsson for infringement of a patent...more
The DOJ Antitrust Division’s high profile, unsuccessful attempt to block the AT&T/Time Warner merger ended on February 26, 2019 after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed the trial court’s decision to allow...more
On February 26, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unanimously affirmed a district court decision rejecting the U.S. Department of Justice’s challenge to AT&T’s $85 billion merger with Time Warner, cementing...more
On 26 February 2019 AT&T won its appeal at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit when the district court's decision denying the government's attempt to block AT&T from acquiring Time Warner Inc. was...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Lourie, O’Malley, and Wallach. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas Summary: When a case is dismissed with prejudice for lack of standing,...more
On February 26, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an en banc decision in FTC v. AT&T holding that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Act’s “common carrier” exemption is activity-based, reversing the...more
A recent decision involving an AT&T trademark demonstrates how the global reach of technology businesses can sometimes result in a blurring of markets and make documentation of trademark use in Canada difficult to retrieve...more
Patentee’s Unnecessarily Broad Prosecution Disclaimer Affirmed by Federal Circuit - In Technology Properties Limited LLC v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Appeal Nos. 2016-1306, -1307, -1309, -1310, -1311, the Federal...more
Addressing evidentiary issues, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed with the district court that a settlement agreement related to the patent at issue is admissible as proof of a reasonable royalty. Prism...more
An employee goes on television and maligns his bosses for a new company policy with half-truths—and his bosses fire him for disloyalty. Sounds justified, right? Wrong. A National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decision...more
It must be frustrating to be in the minority of an administrative adjudicatory body and to constantly be forced to write dissenting opinions, as was the case for former National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) member Brian E....more
It was probably not that surprising that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia reversed the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) decision in Southern New England Telephone Company, 1356 NLRB No. 118...more
In a refreshing decision for employers, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals earlier this month tossed an eyebrow-raising NLRB decision which permitted AT&T customer-facing and publicly visible technicians to wear faux prison...more
Eschewing legal niceties in favor of common sense, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently ruled that AT&T did not violate federal labor law when it prohibited its employees from wearing...more
If the NLRB has a consistent adversary, it is common sense. And so, it was a bad sign for the NLRB when the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals began its review of a recent NLRB Order with the following line:...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has ruled that AT&T had a right to forbid employees, when interacting with the public, from wearing t-shirts that the company reasonably believed could harm its...more
Addressing the requirements for extending and reopening the time to appeal under Fed. R. App. Pro. 4(a), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s denial to either extend or reopen the time...more