Government Argues Sorenson VRS Rate Tier Challenge Foreclosed; Sorenson Pushes RUE Profile Delay
Sorenson Communications' challenge to FCC video relay service rate tiers is foreclosed, and the tiers are reasonable under the Communications Act, said a government brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Sorenson v. FCC, No.…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
17-1198, posted Tuesday on the agency's webpage. The FCC/DOJ brief said "well-settled principles of claim preclusion" barred the company's challenge to a 2017 order (see 1707060062 and 1707070058), its third against VRS compensation involving rate tiers. "If, as Sorenson claims, Section 225 prohibits tiered rates, the statute prohibited the tiered rate structures adopted by the FCC in both 2010 and 2013," both challenged by the largest VRS provider, it said. "But in neither Sorenson I nor Sorenson II did Sorenson claim that Section 225 precluded tiering." The brief said the FCC decision was a "permissible construction" of the law, and the tiered rates were reasonable, "particularly considering that the single VRS rate alternative proposed by Sorenson would likely have eliminated most or all of its remaining competitors." The government said the Video Relay Services Consumer Association lacked standing to challenge the order because it hadn't shown members have standing. VRSCA's argument the FCC was required to include the costs of VRS provider free equipment to users "was considered and rejected in Sorenson I and Sorenson II," and "still has no merit," said the brief. Meanwhile, Sorenson discussed VRS issues with FCC Disability Rights Office staffers, including the company's request to suspend an April deadline for providers to implement a "Relay User Equipment [RUE] Profile" for ensuring interoperability with an "Accessible Communication for Everyone (ACE) App." The staffers acknowledged ACE App is still not ready for testing by providers and their office is awaiting approval of an order to suspend the April compliance date," said a filing in docket 10-51. At staff request, Sorenson submitted a "list of actions not in providers' control that must be completed before" they can update and test their platforms for the app interoperability.