4/9. The House Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet amended and approved HR 1320, the Commercial Spectrum Enhancement Act, by a unanimous voice vote.

Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-LA), the Chairman of the full Committee, explained the purpose and nature of the bill. He said in his opening statement that "H.R. 1320 will accomplish the dual goals of making spectrum available for advanced commercial uses and fully compensating federal agencies required to relocate spectrum operations to make bands available for commercial use. It will ensure that at least 90 MHz of new spectrum is made available for advanced wireless services that will give consumers mobile high-speed Internet access and other innovative applications."

He added that "this bill does not reflect normal congressional process. This bill takes away the normal role that the Appropriations Committees plays in how government receipts are distributed to and spent by federal agencies." He added that this may cause problems for supporters of the bill when they seek passage by the House and Senate.

Rep. Tauzin (at right) explained that "It is important that we alter the normal process because relocation will never occur if federal agencies are subjected to the appropriations process to relocate spectrum operations. These agencies must have absolute certainty that the money will be available and that they can spend it. And the current relocation rules are fatally flawed. Auction bidders have to pay twice -- once to the Treasury and another time to the agencies. That process is beyond cumbersome. These rules give potential auction bidders no incentive to participate in an auction because they have no idea how much they will have to spend to relocate government spectrum users."

Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), the ranking Democrat on the full Committee, criticized spectrum management generally, but stated that he supports HR 1320.

Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), the Chairman of the Subcommittee, presided at the hearing. He offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute, [PDF]. He said that this amendment has the support of the Department of Defense (DOD) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)

Ted Kassinger, General Counsel of the Department of Commerce (DCO), wrote a letter [PDF scan] to Rep. Upton and Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) on April 8. He stated that "I want to reiterate the Administration's support for enactment of legislation to create a spectrum relocation fund. Such a fund is an important spectrum management tool that will streamline and shorten the process for reimbursing incumbent government users, which in turn, will facilitate their relocation to comparable spectrum and thus expedite the opening of the original spectrum to new services and technologies."

He added that the "Chairman's amendment in the nature of a substitute will not only provide for full reimbursement of all relocation costs incurred by incumbents in relocating to new spectrum or utilizing an alternative technology, but also will provide a streamlined mechanism for making the funds available to relocating Federal agencies and greater certainty to auction bidders and incumbents. Moreover, this bill addresses most of the concerns the Administration had with the bill as introduced."

NTIA Director Nancy Victory testified in support of creating a spectrum relocation fund at the March 25, 2003 hearing to the Subcommittee. See, prepared testimony. See also, TLJ story titled "House Subcommittee Holds Hearing On Commercial Spectrum Enhancement Act", March 25, 2003.

This bill would facilitate the relocation of spectrum from federal users, such as the DOD, to commercial users, such as Third Generation (3G) wireless service providers. 3G is intended to provide broadband internet access for portable devices. The bill would create a "Spectrum Relocation Fund", funded out of auction proceeds, to pay for relocation costs of federal entities whose spectrum is reallocated. The bill would apply to, but not be limited to, the 1710-1755 MHz band.

Rep. Upton summarized the changes made by his amendment in the nature of a substitute. He said that it would provide the NTIA with 12 months to apprise the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) of the cost estimates of, and timelines for, relocation of government spectrum operations before an auction of frequencies used by such operations occurs. It would also create a unified fund for auction proceeds rather than separate accounts. It would also require surplus auction proceeds to be returned to the Treasury no later than eight years after their initial deposit in the Spectrum Relocation Fund. It would also provide a notice to Congress if additional transfers to an agency will exceed 10% of the original amount transferred for relocation. It would also provide an active role for the General Accounting Office (GAO) to review costs incurred during relocation. Finally, it would limit the applicability of the fund to frequencies eligible under current law.

Rep. Markey (at right), the ranking Democrat on the Subcommittee, advocated creation of a "Digital Dividends Trust Fund" that would provide grants for educational technology projects, teacher training, digitizing cultural materials in libraries, public safety, and other things. He offered, but later withdrew, an amendment [PDF] to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to create such a fund.

Rep. Markey also offered, but withdrew, another amendment [PDF] to the Upton amendment. This second amendment would have provided that "nothing in this Act or the amendments made by this Act shall be construed as limiting the Federal Communications Commission’s authority to allocate bands of frequencies that are reallocated from Federal use to non-Federal use for unlicensed, public safety, shared, or non-commercial use." He explained that auctions should not be mandated, for example, for spectrum reallocated for unlicensed use or for public safety. This amendment would also have required the NTIA to write a report on policy options that are available to compensate government agencies for the relocation of spectrum operations to accommodate unlicensed, public safety, shared, or non-commercial purpose.

Rep. Markey withdrew his amendments after Rep. Upton committed to holding a hearing, and working with Rep. Markey, on the issues addressed by Rep. Markey's amendments.

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) stated that he is concerned about the lack of adequate spectrum and funding for first responders. He stated that he had an amendment to allow use of spectrum relocation trust funds for public safety purposes. He did not offer the amendment. Rep. Upton committed to holding a hearing on this matter, "with an eye towards moving legislation".

Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), who represents a New York City district, stated that public safety officials from New York want a solid block of public safety spectrum, and more money for equipment.

4/9. The House Science Committee held a hearing titled "The Societal Implications of Nanotechnology". The hearing also focused on HR 766, the Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2003.

Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY), the Chairman of the Committee, and a sponsor of HR 766, said in his opening statement that "the most extravagant fear about nanotechnology is that it will yield nanobots that will turn the world into ``gray goo.´´ That's not a fear I share, but I do worry that the debate about nanotechnology could turn into ``gray goo´´ -- with its own deleterious consequences."

He added that "The one thing we can be sure of is that nanotechnology will be neither the unalloyed boon predicted by technophiles nor the unmitigated disaster portrayed by technophobes. The truth will be in between, and it is worth probing."

Rep. Boehlert also stated that Hr 766 "authorizes research grants on societal and ethical consequences, and requires that that research be integrated with the physical science research. We will mark up that bill on April 30 and I expect it to be on the House floor the following week."

Several witnesses referenced Michael Crichton's book, Prey [Amazon], a science fiction thriller about a predatory cloud of self sustaining, self reproducing, intelligent nano-particles that escape from a laboratory. Vicki Colvin of Rice University said in her prepared testimony that "This may be gripping science fiction; it is not science fact."

See also, prepared testimony of Ray Kurzweil [45 pages in PDF] , Langdon Winner (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute), and Christine Peterson (Foresight Institute), and Science Committee release.

See also, article in the April 2000 issue of Wired Magazine titled "Why the future doesn't need us", by Bill Joy, the Chief Scientist at Sun Microsystems.

4/4. Phil Bond, Under Secretary of Commerce for the Technology Administration (TA), gave a speech titled "Growth and Policy Implications of Nanotechnology" at the National Nanotechnology Initiative 2003 Conference in Washington DC.

Bond (at right) reviewed some of the potential applications of nanotechnology, such as "Nanocomputers smaller than a bacterium" and "Data storage devices with memory densities sufficient to store the entire collection of the Library of Congress on a device the size of a sugar cube".

"The good news is the United States is uniquely positioned to reap the potential of nanotechnology", said Bond. "Not only has President Bush has proposed record levels of Federal support for nanotechnology through the NNI, but state governments are spending additional millions to create and support nanotechnology centers at universities around the country. Our institutions of higher education are unparalleled in their ability to educate students and to conduct cutting edge research. Nano business and professional associations are forming faster than self-replicating nanobots. And we have an entrepreneurial culture and business climate that is the envy of the world."

He concluded with a discussion of societal and ethical issues raised by Michael Crichton and others. Bond said that "The hard truth is, despite all these encouraging activities surrounding the development and commercialization of nanotechnology, many Americans’ understanding of nanotechnology are being shaped by Michael Crichton’s new book, Prey."

Bond observed that "All disruptive technologies face some level of social resistance. During the Industrial Revolution, workers in Holland fearful for their jobs threw their wooden shoes -- sabots -- into the machinery, delivering the term ``sabotage´´ to our vocabulary."

"In the past, some of these fears have been well-founded and rational, it seems to me that most of them have not been well-founded. As we have seen in the early days of biotechnology, the more revolutionary a technology is, the more likely it is to face public resistance in its development and application. Already there are groups advocating a preemptive ban on nanotechnology research until any potential downside can be assessed. I submit that we need not sacrifice jobs on the alter of values, nor values on the alter of jobs", said Bond.

He concluded that "Nanotechnology's future runs through the nation’s capital. The federal government plays an important role in funding fundamental, high-risk research. To borrow a line from BASF ads: We don’t make nanotechnology products, but we fund the science and technology that makes nanotechnology products and processes possible. In addition, many of the societal and ethical concerns about nanotechnology research and products will be debated and addressed here in Washington. Whether that's for the good or detriment of society depends on each of us."

4/9. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Securities and Exchange Commission released a joint paper titled "Interagency Paper on Sound Practices to Strengthen the Resilience of the U. S. Financial System" The purpose of the paper is to to advise financial institutions on steps necessary to protect the financial system from terrorist threats such as the September 11, 2001 attacks.

The paper addresses, among other topics, resiliency of the telecommunications infrastructure, telecommunications redundancy, back up data centers, and the integrity of data transmission.

For example, the paper states that "A number of firms have expressed concerns about the resilience of telecommunications and other critical infrastructure, and the current limitations on an individual firm's ability to obtain verifiable redundancy of service from such carriers. Firms that establish geographically dispersed facilities can achieve additional diversity in their telecommunications and other infrastructure services, which will provide additional resilience in ensuring recovery of critical operations. A number of financial firms are sponsoring industry-wide efforts to explore common infrastructure issues and approaches."

The report also states that "Firms that play significant roles in critical financial markets should maintain sufficient geographically dispersed resources, including staff, equipment and data to recover clearing and settlement activities within the business day on which a disruption occurs."

It continues that "Examples of such arrangements range from maintaining a fully operational geographically dispersed back-up facility for data and operations to utilizing outsourced facilities in which equipment, software, and data are stored for staff to activate. Firms are addressing critical staffing issues in various ways, such as cross training, utilizing staff at underused systems to share or shift loads, rotating employees off-site, and establishing work shifts. A number of firms use outsourced back-up solutions for recovering clearing and settlement activities and data storage. However, numerous commenters expressed concern about the small number of recovery facilities, their lack of geographic diversity and the cost of ensuring availability of facilities during a wide-scale disruption. Firms that use outsourced back-up solutions should take into consideration any heightened risks that could affect access to those facilities during a wide-scale disruption."

4/9. The House Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and the Judiciary (CJS) held a hearing on the budget for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). FTC Chairman Timothy Muris testified.

The FTC requests an appropriation for fiscal year 2004 of $191,132,000 and 1,074 full time equivalent (FTE) employees. This is an increase of $14,524,000 from FY 2003.

Muris' prepared testimony summarizes the activities of the FTC with respect to internet fraud and privacy, including the FTC's do not call registry, identity theft, the Eli Lilly action, fraudulent spam, implementation of the Childrens Online Privacy Protection Act, and the FTC's survey of online gambling.

He also summarized the FTC's activities with respect to competition, including the Rambus action, the joint FTC/DOJ hearings on intellectual property and antitrust, and the FTC Internet Task Force's evaluation of potentially anticompetitive regulations and business practices that could impede e-commerce.

4/9. President Bush nominated three persons to be federal judges: Ronnie Greer (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee), Thomas Hardiman (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania), and William Pryor (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit). See, White House release.

4/9. President Bush nominated James Jochum to be an Assistant Secretary of Commerce. See, White House release.

4/9. The Senate confirmed Richard Bennett to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland by a vote of 99-0. See, Roll Call No. 131.

4/9. The Senate confirmed Dee Drell to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana by a vote of 99-0. See, Roll Call No. 130.

4/9. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) announced that the WIPO Summit on Intellectual Property and the Knowledge Economy, which had been scheduled for April 24-26 in Beijing, China, will not take place as scheduled. The WIPO cited "prevailing circumstances". See, WIPO release.

4/8. The House Government Reform Committee's Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations and the Census held an oversight hearing titled "Cyber Security: The Challenges Facing Our Nation In Critical Infrastructure Protection". See, prepared testimony [75 pages in PDF] of Robert Dacey (General Accounting Office), and prepared testimony of Mark Forman (Office of Management and Budget).

4/9. The U.S. Court of Appeals (7thCir) issued its opinion [13 pages in PDF] in Aura Lamp v. ITC, a case regarding jurisdiction over appeals in patent cases. The jurisdiction of the District Court rested upon a patent claim. Hence, the Seventh Circuit held that the Federal Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction over the appeal. However, what is notable about this case is that the Seventh Circuit, having found that it lacked jurisdiction, proceeded to dismiss the case upon the merits.

Perhaps the Seventh Circuit has held that there is an exception to the Federal Circuit's exclusive jurisdiction where the regional circuit finds, upon the merits, that the appeal is "clearly doomed".

Aura Lamp and International Trading Corporation (ITC) entered into several contracts pertaining to lighting products. Aura filed a complaint in U.S. District Court (EDIll) against ITC alleging breach of contract; it also sought a declaration that a patent held by ITC is invalid. The District Court dismissed the case for lack of prosecution and violation of discovery orders. Aura appealed, not to the Federal Circuit, but to the Seventh Circuit.

28 U.S.C. § 1338 provides, in part, that "The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action arising under any Act of Congress relating to patents, plant variety protection, copyrights and trademarks. Such jurisdiction shall be exclusive of the courts of the states in patent, plant variety protection and copyright cases."

28 U.S.C. § 1295, in turn, provides, in part, that "The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit shall have exclusive jurisdiction -- (1) of an appeal from a final decision of a district court of the United States ... if the jurisdiction of that court was based, in whole or in part, on section 1338 ..."

The Appeals Court held that it has no jurisdiction, and dismissed the case. The Court wrote that "Section 1338 grants original jurisdiction to the district courts over any civil actions arising under the federal patent laws, among other things."

The Court reasoned that "Aura Lamp's complaint contains a claim for patent invalidity. ... Thus, the jurisdiction of the district court was based, at least in part, on the patent laws and jurisdiction over the appeal lies exclusively with the Federal Circuit. This is true even though the district court resolved the case without reference to patent law." Hence, the Appeals Court concluded that the Federal Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction over this appeal.

The Appeals Court, however, did not transfer the appeal to the Federal Circuit. It dismissed the case. It wrote that "At this stage of the proceedings, we may ``take a peek´´ at the merits because whether the appeal has any possible merit bears significantly on our decision to transfer or dismiss the appeal. ... We may do so even though we lack jurisdiction to decide the merits."

The Court continued that "Here, because the case was dismissed for want of prosecution and violations of discovery orders, the district court's ruling rests on procedural matters not unique to patent law. The ruling would thus be reviewed under the law of our own circuit." And, the Court concluded, under the law of the Seventh Circuit, reversal would require a determination of abuse of discretion by the District Court. The Court held that there was no such abuse of discretion.

The Court concluded that "The appeal is ``clearly doomed´´ and there is no reason to waste judicial resources or the resources of the parties by transferring the case."

The House will meet at 10:00 AM. The House is scheduled to take up the conference report [PDF] on S 151, the PROTECT Act.

8:00 - 10:15 AM. The Arlington County Bar Association and the D.C. Bar Association's Intellectual Property Law Section will host a continuing legal education (CLE) seminar titled "Patent Damages -- Current Legal Issues and Strategies". The speakers will be Abram Hoffman and Edward Gold, both of the Economics and Statistics Practice of Price Waterhouse Coopers. The price to attend is $60. For more information, contact 703 228-3390 or acbahead@juno.com. Location: Washington Golf and Country Club, 3017 N. Glebe Road, Arlington VA.

10:00 AM. The House Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on Homeland Security will hold a hearing on the budget for science and technology at the Department of Homeland Security. Under Secretary of Science and Technology Charles McQueary will testify. Location: Room 2359, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Appropriations Committee's Commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary Subcommittee will hold a hearing on the proposed budget for fiscal year 2004 for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Location: Room S-146, Capitol Building.

10:00 AM. The House Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on the VA, HUD and Independent Agencies will hold a hearing on the budget for the National Science Foundation. Location: Room H-143, Capitol Building.

TIME CHANGE. 10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold an executive business meeting. The agenda includes consideration of S 731, the "Secure Authentication Feature and Enhanced Identification Defense Act of 2003" (SAFE ID Act), and S 274, a bill pertaining to class action procedure. The agenda also includes consideration of several pending judicial nominations, including Carolyn Kuhl (9th Circuit), Leon Holmes (Eastern District of Arkansas), Susan Braden (Federal Claims), Charles Lettow (Federal Claims), Cecilia Altonaga (Southern District of Florida), and Patricia Minaldi (Western District of Louisiana). See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

12:00 NOON - 1:45 PM. The Legislation Committee of the DC Bar Association's Intellectual Property Law Section will host a luncheon program titled "Trademark Legislative Agenda". The speakers will be Michael Heltzer (International Trademark Association), Amy Cotton (USPTO), and Paul Levy (Public Citizen Litigation Group). For more information, call 202 626-3463. The price to attend ranges from $25 to $35. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 level.

2:00 PM. The Senate Appropriations Committee's Homeland Security Subcommittee will hold a hearing on the proposed budget for fiscal year 2004 for science and technology. Under Secretary of Science and Technology Charles McQueary will testify. Location: Room 192 or 159 (?), Dirksen Building.

The Progress & Freedom Foundation (PFF), a Washington based think tank that focuses on technology and communications issues, will hold its 10th anniversary celebration. Mitch Daniels, Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), will be the after dinner speaker. FCC Chairman Michael Powell and FTC Chairman Timothy Muris will also be present. For more information, contact Jane Creel at 202 289-8928 or jcreel@pff.org. See, PFF notice. Location: Renaissance Mayflower Hotel.

Day one of a two day conference hosted by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) titled "Colloquium on Science and Technology Policy". See, notice and agenda [PDF]. Location: Washington Plaza Hotel, 10 Thomas Circle, 14th and M Streets, NW.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM.

9:30 AM. The Copyright Office (CO) will hold the first of several hearings regarding the exemption of certain classes of works from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's (DMCA) prohibition against circumvention of technological measures that control access to copyrighted works. At 9:30 AM, there will be a panel on compilations of lists of websites blocked by filtering software; the witnesses will be Seth Finkelstein (supporting the exemption), and David Burt (N2H2, opposing the exemption). At 1:30 PM, there will be a panel copy protected red book audio format compact discs; the panelists will be Steve Englund (RIAA), Seth Greenstein / Jonathan Potter (Digital Media Association), and Thomas Leavens (Full Audio Corporation). See, notice in the Federal Register, March 20, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 54, at Pages 13652 - 13653. (The CO has since changed the dates, times and locations listed in this notice.) See also, CO web page on rulemakings on anticircumvention, the relevant statutory sections at 17 U.S.C. §§ 2101-2105, and story titled "Copyright Office to Hold Hearings on DMCA Anti Circumvention Exemptions", TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 628, March 21, 2003. Location: Mumford Room, LM-649, James Madison Building, Library of Congress, 101 Independence Ave, SE

9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in Unity Broadcasting v. FCC, No. 02-1101. Judges Edwards, Randolph and Tatel will preside. Location: 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

Day long meeting of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Consumer Advisory Committee.

Day two of a two day conference hosted by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) titled "Colloquium on Science and Technology Policy". See, notice and agenda [PDF]. Location: Washington Plaza Hotel, 10 Thomas Circle, 14th and M Streets, NW.

The House will be in recess from April 14 through April 25 for the Spring District Work Period.

12:00 NOON. The Cato Institute will host a panel discussion titled "What's Up with the PATRIOT Act? Concerns about the Legislative Response to 9/11 and the Prospect of a PATRIOT II". The speakers will be Tim Lynch (Cato), and Jim Dempsey (Center for Democracy and Technology). See, notice and registration page. Lunch will be served. Location: Room B-338, Rayburn Building.

Deadline to submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) [MS Word] titled "In the Matter of Second Periodic Review of the Commission's Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion To Digital Television". This is MB Docket No. 03-15, RM 9832, and MM Docket Nos. 99-360, 00-167, and 00-168. See, FCC release and notice in the Federal Register, February 18, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 32, at Pages 7737-7747.

Deadline to submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding on how to use the reallocated Mobile Satellite Service (MSS) spectrum as well as other bands previously proposed for Advanced Wireless Service (AWS) use, the relocation of the Multipoint Distribution Service (MDS), and additional flexibility for the Unlicensed Personal Communications Service (UPCS) band spectrum. This is ET Docket 00-258 and IB Docket No. 99-81. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 13, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 49, at Pages 12015 - 12020.

RESCHEDULED. 9:30 AM. The Copyright Office (CO) will hold the second of four hearings in Washington DC regarding the exemption of certain classes of works from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's (DMCA) prohibition against circumvention of technological measures that control access to copyrighted works. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 20, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 54, at Pages 13652 - 13653. See also, CO web page on rulemakings on anticircumvention, the relevant statutory sections at 17 U.S.C. §§ 2101-2105, and story titled "Copyright Office to Hold Hearings on DMCA Anti Circumvention Exemptions", TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 628, March 21, 2003.

9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in Covad v. Bell Atlantic, No. 02-7057. This case pertains to the applicability of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2, to allegations that an incumbent local exchange carrier (ILEC) has monopolized or attempted to monopolize a market for local telecommunications services. See, amicus curiae brief of the USA/FCC. Location: 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in Cell Telecom v. FCC, No. 02-1264. Judges Edwards, Randolph and Tatel will preside. Location: 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

12:00 NOON - 1:45 PM. The Legislation Committee of the DC Bar Association's Intellectual Property Law Section will host a luncheon program titled "Patent Legislative Agenda". The speakers will be Hayden Gregory (American Bar Association), Chris Katopis (Deputy Administrator for External Affairs, United States Patent and Trademark Office), and Michael Kirk (American Intellectual Property Law Association). The price to attend ranges from $25 to $35. For more information, call 202 626-3463. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) pertaining to the service rules for the Dedicated Short Range Communications Systems in the 5.850-5.925 GHz band (5.9 GHz band). See, notice in the Federal Register, January 15, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 10, at Pages 1999-2002. For more information, contact Nancy Zaczek at 202 418-7590 or nzaczek@fcc.gov, or Gerardo Mejia at 202 418-2895 or gmejia@fcc.gov.

Deadline to submit to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) the 2003 Eligibility Certification Package for the Malcolm Baldrige awards. See, Eligibility Forms [MS Word].

Passover.

10:00 AM - 3:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Technological Advisory Council will hold a meeting. The topic of this meeting will be broadband access technologies. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 28, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 60, at Page 15188. For more information, contact Jeffery Goldthorp at jgoldtho@fcc.gov or 202 418-1096. Location: FCC, 445 12th St. SW, Room TW-C305 (Commission Meeting Room).

12:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Cable Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The speaker will be Sarah Whitesell, Legal Advisor to FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein. RSVP to Wendy Parish at wendy@fcba.org. Location: NCTA, 1724 Massachusetts Ave., NW, 2nd Floor Conference Room.

12:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The speakers will be Peter Tenhula (Director of the FCC's Spectrum Policy Task Force), Paula Ford (Regulatory Counsel for Microsoft), Ashim Roy (ComBasis). For more information, contact Greg Haledjian at 202 777-3972 or Jennifer Cetta at 202 887-1597. RSVP to btoliver@mofocom. Location: Morrison & Foerster, 2000 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 5500.

Extended deadline to submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Inquiry (NOI) [MS Word] regarding "Additional Spectrum for Unlicensed Devices Below 900 MHz and in the 3 GHz Band". Unlicensed devices would include, among other things, 802.11. See, notice in Federal Register, January 21, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 13, at Pages 2730-2733. See also, story titled "FCC Announces Notice of Inquiry Re More Spectrum for Unlicensed Use" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 566, December 12, 2002. For more information, contact Hugh Van Tuyl in the FCC's Office of Engineering & Technology at hvantuyl@fcc.gov or 202 418-7506. This is OET Docket No. 02-380. See, notice of extension [PDF].