Portions of a California complaint alleging Amazon skirted antitrust and unfair competition laws need to be kept sealed to protect “highly confidential and competitive information, the disclosure of which could cause significant harm to Amazon,” said Cristina Fernandez, Amazon corporate counsel-competition, in a declaration in support of the motion to seal posted Tuesday (docket CGC-22-601826) in California Superior Court in San Francisco.

The village of Muttontown, New York, asked for a two-week deadline extension to Oct. 26 to answer a complaint that the municipality dragged its feet on AT&T's application to remedy a service gap, per a letter motion filed Tuesday (docket 2:22-cv-5524) at the U.S. District Court in Central Islip, New York. AT&T consented to the delay, according to a stipulation attached to the letter motion. U.S. Magistrate Judge Lee Dunst granted the motion Thursday.

Dish Network wants the D.C. Circuit to rehear its arguments that the FCC’s authorization of a license modification for SpaceX’s Starlink satellite system to fly at lower altitudes will lead to interference with Dish’s satellite TV business, said a petition for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Tuesday in docket 21-1123, Viasat v. FCC (see 2208260035). “Without a rehearing, SpaceX will continue to operate its enormous nongeostationary satellite system at power levels that risk causing interference into many millions of households receiving satellite television service,” said the filing.

Amazon and Amazon Web Services “expressly deny” they violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act by using the company’s Rekognition facial-imaging technology to monitor employees in Amazon fulfillment centers, said the companies in a recent notice of removal (docket 1:22-cv-05159) in U.S. District Court in Chicago. Amazon and AWS “intend to defend this matter vigorously,” they said.

The Supreme Court will almost undoubtedly recast or cut back the broad immunity that interactive online platforms enjoy via the Communications Decency Act's Section 230 liability shield, but the dearth of high court precedent on Section 230 makes it unclear how the justices will change that legal status quo, legal experts told us. The court granted cert last week to two related cases on social media platforms' legal protection when they are used in conjunction with terror attacks (see 2210030036).

Some users of the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (Pacer) system run by the federal judiciary could see full refunds of the fees they paid to access federal court documents, according to a proposed settlement agreement between three nonprofits and the federal judiciary submitted Tuesday to U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Marriott International filed a motion Friday to compel discovery from Dynasty Marketing Group, one of several defendants in its novel Telephone Consumer Protection Act complaint in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Virginia, alleging infringement of Marriott trademarks by robocalling Marriott impersonators. Marriott seeks "full and complete answers," plus the production of documents, "responsive" to its discovery requests, said a memorandum in support of its motion (docket 1:21-cv-00610).

Dish Network’s “baseless” demand to “claw back” license fees it paid the Pac-12 Network to carry a full slate of games for the 2018 and 2019 college football seasons to compensate for the COVID-19-shortened 2020 season runs “contrary to the plain language” of the parties’ license agreement, alleged the network in a breach of contract complaint Thursday (docket 1:22-cv-02620) in U.S. District Court in Denver.

This is the inaugural issue of Communications Litigation Today, the newest information service from the publisher of Communications Daily. It has been conceptualized in close consultation with Comm Daily subscribers, who identified a need for timely coverage of federal and state legal developments affecting telecom, tech and media companies, with a focus on keeping industry professionals informed about significant judicial proceedings.

YouTube “unlawfully retains information” that identifies consumers “as having requested or obtained specific video materials or services from Google,” in violation of the New York Video Consumer Privacy Act, alleged a class action Oct. 4 (docket 5:22-cv-05713) in U.S. District Court in San Jose. Google maintains the digital records in violation of New York law, which requires video rental companies to destroy personally identifiable information (PII) “as soon as practicable” but no later than one year from the date the information is no longer necessary for the purpose for which it was collected, said the complaint.