The Plaintiffs are small winery owners who cannot sell their wines over the Internet, or by direct mail, because of protectionist legislation in states such as New York. Juanita Swedenburg is an owner of the Swedenburg Winery in northern Virginia. David Lucas owns The Lucas Winery in California. Other plaintiffs are New York state residents and wine consumers who joined in the suit.

New York state statute prohibits Swedenburg and Lucas from selling directly to prospective customers in New York state. New York Alco. Bev. Cont. Law § 102(1)(c) provides in part: "No alcoholic beverages shall be shipped into the state unless the same shall be consigned to a person duly licensed hereunder to traffic in alcoholic beverages. This prohibition shall apply to all shipments of alcoholic beverages into New York state and includes importation or distribution for commercial purposes, for personal use, or otherwise, and irrespective of whether such alcoholic beverages were purchased within or without the state ..."

New York Alco. Bev. Cont. Law § 102(1)(d) provides in part: "No common carrier or other person shall bring or carry into the state any alcoholic beverages, unless the same shall be consigned to a person duly licensed hereunder to traffic in alcoholic beverages ..."

New York Alco. Bev. Cont. Law § 102(1)(a) provides that: "No person shall send or cause to be sent into the state any letter, postcard, circular, newspaper, pamphlet, order kit, order form, invitation to order, price list, or publication of any kind containing an advertisement or a solicitation of any order for any alcoholic beverages, irrespective of whether the purchase is made or to be made within or without the state, or whether intended for commercial or personal use or otherwise, unless such person shall be duly licensed hereunder to traffic in alcoholic beverages."

That is, the New York system for alcohol sales requires that alcohol producers must go through licensed wholesalers and distributors who must in turn go through licensed retailers who then may sell to consumers.

The New York statutes provide several exceptions to the ban on direct sales, but they apply only to wineries located within the state of New York.

On February 3, 2000 Swedenburg, Lucas, and their prospective New York customers filed their Original Complaint in the U.S. District Court (SDNY) against Edward Kelly and other Commissioners of the New York State Liquor Authority. The state moved to dismiss. The District Court issued its Decision and Order denying that motion on September 5, 2000. See, TLJ story on the Decision and Order and TLJ story on related cases.

Following discovery, the parties filed cross motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff's asserted that the statutory scheme violates the Commerce Clause and the Privileges and Immunities Clause. New York argued that its scheme is permissible under the 21st Amendment.

The District Court granted plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, holding that New York's ban on direct wines sales violates the dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Judge Richard Berman wrote the opinion. He reviewed the legislative history of the statute, and concluded that its purpose was to protect in state wineries.

The Court did not reach the Privileges and Immunities issue. Also, the Court has yet to address remedies. It requested further briefing, and set a hearing for December 5.

Clint Bolick, VP of the Institute for Justice, counsel for the plaintiffs, stated in a release that "This is a decisive victory against the monopolists who would stand between consumers and their wine. It should have widespread ramifications not only for wine but for all Internet commerce. This is an occasion to pop some corks in celebration of an important decision for consumers."

However, the legal precedents on the constitutionality of state barriers to direct wine sales are not uniform. In particular, the U.S. Court of Appeals (7thCir) reached a different conclusion in its opinion in Bridenbaugh v. Wilson. In that case, the plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of an Indiana statute that made it unlawful for persons in another state to ship an alcoholic beverage directly to an Indiana resident. The District Court held that the Indiana direct shipment regulation was unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause, and granted the plaintiffs' summary judgment motion (Bridenbaugh v. O'Bannon, 78 F. Supp.2d 828 (N.D. Ind. 1999)). Then, the Seventh Circuit reversed, upholding the constitutionality of the state ban.

Judge Frank Easterbrook wrote that "This case pits the twenty-first amendment, which appears in the Constitution, against the ``dormant commerce clause,´´ which does not." He continued that the 21st Amendment (which repealed prohibition) "directly authorizes state control over imports, while the premise of dormant commerce clause jurisprudence is an inference that the grant of power to Congress in Art. I sec.8 cl. 3 implies a limitation on state authority over the same subject. We must decide how the combination of express grant and implied withdrawal of state power applies to" the Indiana ban on direct sales of wine. He came down on the side of the 21st Amendment.

He rejected arguments that the focus of the 21st Amendment was temperance. Instead, he concluded that the Indiana statute "has one real economic effect on out-of-state sellers who neither have nor seek Indiana permits: it channels their sales through Indiana permit-holders, enabling Indiana to collect its excise tax equally from in-state and out-of-state sellers. As the history of the twenty-first amendment confirms, this is precisely what sec.2 is for."

He also rejected the argument that there was discrimination. He noted that "Wine originating in California, France, Australia, or Indiana passes through the same three tiers and is subjected to the same taxes. Where's the functional discrimination?"

Perhaps the Swedenburg and Bridenbaugh cases are distinguishable on their underlying facts. New York exempted in state wineries from its ban on direct sales.

There are also other cases, including Bainbridge v. Bush, 148 F.Supp.2d 1306 (M.D.Fla. 2001), in which the District Court upheld Florida's ban on direct shipment of wine. However, it was vacated and remanded by the 11th Circuit earlier this month in Bainbridge v. Turner.

Clint Bolick also stated, "This is not the end of the road. We expect an appeal. We fully expect this important decision for consumer freedom will ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court."

Also, it should be noted that legal challenges to state protectionist statutes that impede electronic commerce in wine products face greater obstacles than other challenges. First, there is the 21st Amendment obstacle. Second, there is the state's interest in limiting sales to minors. As Judge Easterbrook put it, "the twenty-first amendment empowers Indiana to control alcohol in ways that it cannot control cheese".

The petitioners in this consolidated action are Alabama Power Company (APC) and Gulf Power Company. Among the intervenors are other power companies. Other intervenors are cable companies. The respondent is the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which promulgated the rule that is the subject of these petitions for review.

The Court wrote that in the Pole Attachments Act of 1978, and amendments thereto in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Congress "focused on the relationship between cable television companies and electric power companies. Power companies have something that cable companies need: pole networks. Concerned about the monopoly prices power companies could extract from the cable companies, Congress allowed cable companies to force their way onto utility poles at regulated rates."

47 U.S.C. § 224, at subsection (f)(1), states that "A utility shall provide a cable television system or any telecommunications carrier with nondiscriminatory access to any pole, duct, conduit, or right-of-way owned or controlled by it." The Court described this language, which was added in 1996, as a "forced access regime".

The subject of cable companies' access to the poles of electric companies has been the subject of many FCC and court proceedings in the 11th Circuit. In the present proceeding, however, the power companies sought a ruling that the rate imposed by the FCC violates the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment. The Appeals Court rejected the petition for review. Judge Gerald Tjoflat wrote the opinion for the three judge panel.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) has held that the U.S. Foreign Sales Corporation (FSC) tax regime, and its replacement, the Extraterritorial Income Exclusion (ETI), constitute illegal export subsidies. On August 30 the WTO released a Decision of the Arbitrator [46 pages in PDF] that authorizes the EU to impose $4 Billion in countermeasures, or retaliatory tariffs. Retaliatory tariffs by the EU could harm U.S. high tech companies, and other exporters.

	Dam

Dam stated that "The sad truth is that our international tax rules no longer serve our national interest. In this age of globalization, international transactions generate a large and growing share of our national income. Yet changes to the international provisions of the U.S. corporate tax code in recent decades have ignored this trend, and have oftentimes more impaired than improved American companies’ ability to compete abroad. More often, changes to the tax code have focused on increasing tax revenues rather than assuring the competitiveness of U.S. business operations, and thus, strengthening the health of our economy."

He reiterated President Bush's position. "President Bush decided several months ago that the United States would comply with the WTO ruling. The President made two further decisions. He said that any response to the ruling would have to increase the competitiveness of U.S. business. He also pledged to work with the Congress to create the solution, and we have been working closely with Chairman Thomas and the House Ways and Means Committee. We have begun to work just as closely with the Senate Finance Committee."

He offered a proposal for reforming the tax code. "I believe that legislative changes could be enacted to limit Subpart F to truly passive income – such as portfolio dividends, interest and the like. At the very least we should take a hard look at the so-called active/passive dichotomy in Subpart F rules. We should not preserve tax rules that do not reflect the present realities of international corporate business, in which globalization requires centralization of functions, and in which services are not just a major wealth-creating activity, but one in which U.S. businesses have a comparative advantage."

Assistant Attorney General Charles James wrote a letter to Ky Ewing of the law firm of Vinson & Elkins, counsel for the 3G Patent Platform Partnership (3GPPP), explaining the DOJ's decision.

James reviewed the technologies involved. He wrote that "There are two generations of wireless communications systems in use today in the United States and other nations. The first uses analog transmission technology, while the second generation ("2G") uses various digital transmission technologies and makes possible the provision of some additional services along with voice telephony. The third generation ("3G") of wireless communication systems, also involving the use of digital transmission technologies, will enable not only wireless voice telephony, but also the transmission of data at rates much higher than those of the second generation systems, making additional applications possible. As with the second generation, there will not be a single global 3G radio interface technology. Pursuant to its International Mobile Telephony-2000 ("IMT-2000") project, the International Telecommunication Union ("ITU") has approved five different radio interface technologies for use in 3G systems, which determine how a signal travels over the air from a user's handset to an operator's terrestrial network ..." (Footnote omitted.)

James also reviewed the role of patents in 3G standards. He wrote that "As with most standardized technology, utilization of any of the interface standards may implicate the patent rights of numerous entities. As of June 2000, a total of 45 firms had claimed ownership of at least one patent essential to compliance with one or more of the 3G radio interface standards to at least one standards-related body. Consequently, it appears likely that any operator of a 3G wireless system and any manufacturer of 3G equipment, whether handsets or network infrastructure, regardless of the particular radio interface technology it adopts, will need to acquire licenses from multiple patent holders, and for some standards may need licenses for a large number of patents. Each such patent owner could exclude an operator or manufacturer from the use of a 3G technology by denying it a license." (Footnote omitted.)

James noted that the 3GPPP had originally proposed a single patent platform, but has since agreed to the separation into five largely independent platforms, one for each competing 3G wireless technology.

James concluded that "it appears likely that the Platform arrangements described are not likely to impede competition and could offer some integrative efficiencies for users of the various 3G interface standards. ... For these reasons, the Department is not presently inclined to initiate antitrust enforcement action against the conduct you have described."

See also, DOJ release and EU release.

This NPRM seeks comment on licensing and service rules for the 5.850 - 5.925 GHz band for Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) in the ITS Radio Service. ITS provides wireless communications links between moving surface vehicles, and between vehicles and road side units. Its primary applications pertain to public safety, such as avoiding vehicle collisions, emergency vehicle traffic signal preemption, traffic management, and electronic toll collection.

However, this NPRM also requests comment on whether the FCC should also permit commercial use of this spectrum. It states that "In addition to public safety, ITS America recommends that private radio licensees providing DSRC-based ITS services be permitted in the band. ITS America believes that permitting private radio licensees in the 5.9 GHz band is necessary to achieve national interoperability of DSRC services; in essence ITS America maintains that permitting private radio licensees would create an incentive for vendors to quickly and economically develop the technology necessary for the numerous DSRC applications contemplated for this band. Incentives are needed because ``making DSRC available in the 5.9 GHz band will require a very large technology investment by prospective vendors´´ who are ``reluctant to make such an investment unless there is a clear market for the resulting products.´´ Public safety entities would then benefit from the cost savings derived from economies of scale, and ``safety-related DSRC services should be accorded the highest priority in the licensing and service rules.´´ In light of ITS America's consensus building activities and the favorable comments on this issue in response to the Public Notice, we seek comment on whether to allow “private,´´ i.e., ``non-public safety´´ DSRC operations in some portion of the 5.9 GHz band." (Footnotes omitted.)

This is WT Docket No. 01-90, ET Docket No. 98-95, and RM-9096. For more information, contact Nancy Zaczek at 202 418-0680 or  nzaczek@fcc.gov.

The FCC has yet to publish a notice of this item in the Federal Register. Comments will be due 60 days after publication. Reply comments will be due 90 after publication in the Federal Register.

11/15. The FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC) issued an advisory in which it states that "The Internet security community has identified several new vulnerabilities in the Internet Software Consortium's (ISC) Berkeley Internet Name Domain (BIND) software, which is used by many ISPs to provide DNS services."

11/12. A grand jury of the U.S. District Court (EDVa) returned a seven count indictment [14 pages in PDF] of Gary McKinnon alleging computer fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1030. McKinnon, an unemployed computer system engineer residing in London, England, is alleged to have accessed and damaged without authorization computers belonging to the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, Department of Defense and NASA, as well a private businesses. The indictment stated that McKinnon used a "software program that provides a remote access and remote administration package for computers on the Internet ..." Then, for example, he "accessed a computer belonging to and used exclusively by the United States Army, Fort Myer, Virginia, ...  The defendant then obtained administrator privileges and transmitted codes, information and commands that: (1) deleted approximately 1300 user accounts; (2) installed [the software program]; (3) deleted critical system files necessary for the operation of the computer; (4) copied a file containing usernames and encrypted passwords for the computer; and (5) installed tools used for obtaining unauthorized access to computers. As a result of such conduct, the defendant intentionally caused damage without authorization by impairing the integrity and availability of data, programs, a system and information ..." (Brackets added by TLJ. See indictment for name of program.)

11/15. The Senate confirmed Jonathan Adelstein to be a Commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Commissioner Michael Copps released a statement [MS Word] praising Adelstein, and stating that now the FCC "will be up and running at full complement and in the way intended by the statutes that guide us." Regulated companies and the groups that represent them released statements praising the new Commissioner. See, for examples, statement by CTIA, statement by NCTA, statement by CompTel, statement by NAB, and statement by BellSouth.

11/14. Al Vincent was named Associate Administrator for Telecommunication Sciences and Director of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration's (NTIA) Institute for Telecommunication Sciences (ITS) in Boulder, Colorado. He will serve as the principal advisor on telecommunication sciences to the NTIA Director. See, NTIA release.

11/14. The Senate confirmed Wayne Abernathy to be an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.

11/14. The Senate confirmed Blanquita Cullum to be a Member of the Broadcasting Board of Governors for a term expiring August 13, 2005.

11/15. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved the nominations of Dennis Shedd to be a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and Michael McConnell to be a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit on November 11. The full Senate confirmed Michael McConnell by a voice vote on November 15. The Senate is scheduled to take up the Shedd nomination on Monday, November 18.

11/14. The Senate confirmed John Rogers to be a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The Senate also confirmed 17 nominees to be U.S. District Court judges: Stanley Chesler (New Jersey), Rosemary Collyer (District of Columbia), Mark Fuller (Middle District of Alabama), Daniel Hovland (North Dakota), Kent Jordan (Delaware), James Kinkeade (Northern District of Texas), Robert Klausner (Central District of California), Robert Kugler (New Jersey), Ronald Leighton (Western District of Washington), Jose Linares (New Jersey), Alia Ludlum (Western District of Texas), William Martini (District of New Jersey), Thomas Phillips (Eastern District of Tennessee), Linda Reade (Northern District of Iowa), William Smith (Rhode Island), Jeffrey White (Northern District of California), and Freda Wolfson (New Jersey).

11/14. Belinda Anderson was named BellSouth's Vice President policy resolution, for regulatory and external affairs.

The original HR 4664 was a bill to authorize appropriations for the National Science Foundation. It passed the House by a vote of 397-25 on June 5, 2002. See, Roll Call No. 212. See also, story titled "House Approves NSF Authorization Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 445, June 6, 2002. This version of the bill, also known as the "Investing in America's Future Act" authorized the appropriation of $5.5 Billion for FY 2003 for the NSF. It included in the funding authorization $704 Million for networking and information technology research, $238 Million for the Nanoscale Science and Engineering Priority Area, and $60 Million for the Mathematical Sciences Priority Area.

HR 4664, as passed by the House and Senate in November, is a vehicle for the combination and passage of several related bills. House Science Committee stated in a release that "The version of H.R. 4664 approved last night is a House-Senate compromise that includes language from five House-passed Science Committee bills -- H.R. 4664 (the NSF authorization); H.R. 1858 (on K-12 math and science education); H.R. 100 (on master teachers); H.R. 3130 (The Tech Talent Act, on undergraduate education); and H.R. 2051 (on biotechnology research) -- and from the Senate NSF authorization (S. 2817). The compromise was reached in mid-October, but could not come to the Senate floor then because of Administration objections."

The release added that "H.R. 4664 adds language worked out with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to satisfy the Administration's objections. The language makes the last two years of authorization (fiscal years 2006 and 2007) contingent on a finding by the Congress that NSF ``has made successful progress toward meeting [specified] management goals,´´ taking into consideration OMB's evaluation on that progress."

The Senate will meet at 11:00 AM. It is scheduled to begin consideration of the nomination of Dennis Shedd to be a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. It may take the bill to create a new Department of Homeland Security.

7:00 AM - 2:00 PM. The Information Technology Association of America (ITAA), Northern Virginia Technology Council, Business Software Alliance (BSA), and others, will host a conference titled "Technology and Homeland Security: A Symposium with Public Sector CIOs". The speakers include Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA), Steve Cooper (CIO of the Office of Homeland Security), and Mark Everson (Office of Management and Budget). The price to attend is $65. To register, or for more information, contact Michael Kerr at mkerr@itaa.org. Location: The Ritz Carlton Tysons Corner, 1700 Tysons Boulevard, McLean, VA.

8:00 - 11:00 AM. There will be an event titled "Homeland Security Financing Briefing". The scheduled speakers include Mark Holman (Deputy Assistant to the President for Homeland Security), Bill Hoagland (Staff Director of the Senate Budget Committee), and Scott Lilly (Minority Staff Director of the House Appropriations Committee). It is organized by Equity International. For more information, contact Bill Loiry or Carrie Brown at 202 756 2244. Location: Holeman Lounge, National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW.

9:30 AM. The U.S. District Court (DC) will hold a motion hearing in CBS Broadcasting v. Echostar Communications, D.C. No. 1:2002ms0410. Judge Kennedy will preside. Location: Courtroom 14, 333 Constitution Ave. NW.

10:00 - 11:00 AM. The Department of Commerce's (DOC) Technology Administration (TA) will host a media roundtable. The speakers will be Phil Bond (Under Secretary of Commerce for Technology), Ben Wu (Deputy Under Secretary), Bruce Mehlman (Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy), Chris Israel (Deputy Assistant Secretary). In addition, James Leutze and Jane Patterson from North Carolina's Rural Internet Access Authority will discuss spurring broadband demand. See, TA release. For more information, contact Cheryl Mendonsa at 202 482-8321 or cheryl.mendonsa @ta.doc.gov. Location: DOC, Room 4813, 14th and Constitution Ave., NW.

Deadline to submit comments to the President's Critical Infrastructure Protection Board regarding the document titled "National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace", which was released on September 18. For more information, contact Tommy Cabe at 202 456-5420. See, notice in the Federal Register.

12:15 PM. The FCBA's Common Carrier Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The speakers will be the FCC Commissioners' wireline competition advisors. Location: Willkie Farr & Gallagher, 1875 K Street, 2nd Floor, NY Conference Room.

5:30 - 6:45 PM. Richard Posner, Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals (7thCir), will give a lecture titled "The Political Economy of Intellectual Property Law" at an AEI-Brookings Joint Center event. A wine and cheese reception will follow at 6:45 PM. See, online registration page. Location: AEI, Wohlstetter Conference Center, 12th Floor, 1150 17th Street, NW.

6:00 - 8:00 PM. The FCBA will host a CLE seminar titled "The FCC’s Triennial Review of Unbundled Network Elements: How Significant are UNE-P and other UNEs to Local Competition?" Registrations and cancellations due by 5:00 PM on November 15. Location: Dow Lohnes & Albertson, Suite 800, 1200 New Hampshire Avenue, NW.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the FCC regarding its request to refresh its record regarding customer proprietary network information (CPNI) implications when a carrier goes out of business, sells all or part of its customer base, or seeks bankruptcy protection. This is the FCC's Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket Nos. 96-115, 96-149 and 00-257. See, notice in the Federal Register.

Deadline to submit applications for planning and construction grants to the NTIA for public television facilities under the Public Telecommunications Facilities Program (PTFP). See, notice in the Federal Register.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The House Science Committee will meet to mark up several bills that are not related to information technology. It will then proceed with a hearing titled "The 2001 Presidential Awardees for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching: Views from the Blackboard". Webcast. Location: Room 2318, Rayburn Building.

12:00 NOON. The FCBA's Transactional Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch on the Sarbannes Oxley Act. RSVP to Donna Farber at donna.farber@lw.com. Location: Latham & Watkins, Lincoln Square Bldg., Suite 1000, 555 Eleventh St., NW.

12:30 PM. The FCBA will host a luncheon. The speaker will be NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue. The price is $45 for members, $35 for government & law student members, and $55 for non-members. Registrations and cancellations are due by 5:00 PM on November 15. For more information, call 202 293-4000. Location: JW Marriott Hotel, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.

12:15 PM. The FCBA's Global Telecommunications Development Committee and International Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The topic will be "Financing Telecom Projects in Developing Countries: The Role of OPIC, Export Import Bank, and the International Finance Corporation (IFC)". The speakers will be Roger Cohen (Export Import Bank), Brian Christaldi (OPIC), and Jean-Francois Dupuy (IFC). For more information, contact Janet Hernandez at 202 736-1814. RSVP to Julie Ilett at jilett@coudert.com or 202 736-1819. Location: Coudert Brothers, 1627 Eye St., NW, 11th floor.

CANCELLED. 12:15 PM. The FCBA's Cable Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The speakers will be John Wong and Michael Lance (Division Chief and Deputy Division Chief of the FCC Media Bureau's Engineering Division). For more information call Lisa Cordell at 202 939-7934. RSVP to Wendy Parish at wendy @fcba.org. Location: NCTA, 1724 Massachusetts Ave., NW.

3:00 PM. Uma Suthersanen will speak on "Copyright and Human Rights in Europe". She is a Senior Research Fellow at the Queen Mary Intellectual Property Research Institute in London. For more information, contact Robert Brauneis at rbraun@main.nlc.gwu.edu or 202 994-6138. Location: Faculty Conference Center, 5th Floor of Burns, George Washington University Law School, 2000 H Street, NW.

6:30 - 10:00 PM. The FCBA will host a charity auction. For more information, contact Heidi Kurtz (FCBA) at 202 293-4000. Admission is free, and it is open to the public. The event features a live auction, silent auctions, raffles, hours d’oeuvres and a cash bar. Location: Capitol Hilton Hotel, 16th and K Streets, NW.

Deadline to submit comments to the The FCC in response to its requests for comments regarding whether to revise, clarify or adopt any additional rules in order to more effectively carry out Congress's directives in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA). See, notice in the Federal Register, October 8, 2002, Vol. 67, No. 195, at Pages 62667 - 62681.

Deadline to submit a request to participate in roundtable meetings hosted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) regarding small business views on foreign patent challenges. The USPTO is seeking comments, and holding roundtable meetings, pursuant to a recommendation contained in a General Accounting Office (GAO) report [PDF] titled "Federal Action Needed to Help Small Businesses Address Foreign Patent Challenges". This report was released on August 22, 2002. See also, story titled "GAO Reports Foreign Patent Challenges Facing Small Businesses" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 497, August 23, 2002. See, notice in the Federal Register, October 28, 2002, Vol. 67, No.208, at Pages 65786 - 65787.

11/15. SpectraSite Holdings, a wireless tower operator, filed a Chapter 11 petition for bankruptcy in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court (EDNC). See, release.

11/13. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced that the National Intellectual Property Law Enforcement Coordination Council (NIPLECC) has released its annual report. See, USPTO release. However, the USPTO has not published the report in its web site.