5/15. The Supreme Court issued its opinion [12 pages in PDF] in eBay v. MercExhange, vacating the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir). The Court held that the traditional four factor framework that guides a court's decision whether to grant an injunction applies in patent cases.

MercExchange is the holder of U.S. Patent No. 5,845,265, tilted "Consignment Nodes", U.S. Patent No. 6,085,176, titled "Method and apparatus for using search agents to search plurality of markets for items", and U.S. Patent No. 6,202,051, titled "Facilitating internet commerce through internetworked auctions". The 265 patent is a business method patent for an electronic market designed to facilitate the sale of goods between private individuals by establishing a central authority to promote trust among participants.

MercExchange filed a complaint in U.S. District Court (EDVa) against eBay alleging infringement of the three patents. The District Court found willful infringement of some claims, and awarded damages, but not injunctive relief. District Court's opinion is reported at 275 F.Supp. 2d 695.

Both eBay and MercExchange appealed. The Court of Appeals issued its opinion [31 pages in PDF] on March 16, 2005, and an errata [1 page in PDF] on March 22, 2005. The Court of Appeals reversed the denial of injunctive relief. It wrote that there is "no reason to depart from the general rule that courts will issue permanent injunctions against patent infringement absent exceptional circumstances." This opinion is also reported at 401 F.3d 1323.

The Court of Appeals, quoting from its 1989 opinion in Richardson v. Suzuki Motor Co., 868 F.2d 1226, wrote that "Because the ``right to exclude recognized in a patent is but the essence of the concept of property,´´ the general rule is that a permanent injunction will issue once infringement and validity have been adjudged."

eBay filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court. Numerous individuals and groups filed amicus briefs in support of the petition, and on the merits.

The Supreme Court granted certiorari on November 28, 2005. See, story titled "Supreme Court to Consider Availability of Injunctive Relief in Patent Cases" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,261, November 29, 2005.

The Supreme Court vacated the judgment of the Court of Appeals, and remanded to the District Court.

Justice Clarence Thomas (at right) wrote the opinion of the Court. He wrote that "a plaintiff seeking a permanent injunction must satisfy a four-factor test before a court may grant such relief. A plaintiff must demonstrate: (1) that it has suffered an irreparable injury; (2) that remedies available at law, such as monetary damages, are inadequate to compensate for that injury; (3) that, considering the balance of hardships between the plaintiff and defendant, a remedy in equity is warranted; and (4) that the public interest would not be disserved by a permanent injunction." (Citing Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo, 456 U. S. 305 (1982).)

That is, injunctions should not issue automatically following a finding of infringement.

"These familiar principles apply with equal force to disputes arising under the Patent Act", wrote Thomas. Moreover, while the Federal Circuit has departed from this, Thomas concluded that "Nothing in the Patent Act indicates that Congress intended such a departure. To the contrary, the Patent Act expressly provides that injunctions ``may´´ issue ``in accordance with the principles of equity.´´"

The relevant statute, which is codified at 35 U.S.C. § 283, provides in full that "The several courts having jurisdiction of cases under this title may grant injunctions in accordance with the principles of equity to prevent the violation of any right secured by patent, on such terms as the court deems reasonable."

Thomas concluded that "we take no position on whether permanent injunctive relief should or should not issue in this particular case, or indeed in any number of other disputes arising under the Patent Act. We hold only that the decision whether to grant or deny injunctive relief rests within the equitable discretion of the district courts, and that such discretion must be exercised consistent with traditional principles of equity, in patent disputes no less than in other cases governed by such standards."

Thomas wrote for a unanimous court. However, Chief Justice Roberts wrote a concurring opinion in which Justices Scalia and Ginsburg joined. Also, Justice Kennedy wrote a concurring opinion in which Justices Stevens, Souter and Breyer joined.

Roberts wrote that "From at least the early 19th century, courts have granted injunctive relief upon a finding of infringement in the vast majority of patent cases. This "long tradition of equity practice" is not surprising, given the difficulty of protecting a right to exclude through monetary remedies that allow an infringer to use an invention against the patentee’s wishes -- a difficulty that often implicates the first two factors of the traditional four-factor test. This historical practice, as the Court holds, does not entitle a patentee to a permanent injunction or justify a general rule that such injunctions should issue. The Federal Circuit itself so recognized in Roche Products, Inc. v. Bolar Pharmaceutical Co., 733 F. 2d 858, 865–867 (1984). At the same time, there is a difference between exercising equitable discretion pursuant to the established four-factor test and writing on an entirely clean slate."

Kennedy wrote that "In cases now arising trial courts should bear in mindthat in many instances the nature of the patent being enforced and the economic function of the patent holder present considerations quite unlike earlier cases. An industry has developed in which firms use patents not as a basis for producing and selling goods but, instead, primarily for obtaining licensing fees."

He continued that "For these firms, an injunction, and the potentially serious sanctions arising from its violation, can be employed as a bargaining tool to charge exorbitant fees to companies that seek to buy licenses to practice the patent."

"When the patented invention is but a small component of the product the companies seek to produce and the threat of an injunction is employed simply for undue leverage in negotiations, legal damages may well be sufficient to compensate for the infringement and an injunction may not serve the public interest. In addition injunctive relief may have different consequences for the burgeoning number of patents over business methods, which were not of much economic and legal significance in earlier times. The potential vagueness and suspect validity of some of these patents may affect the calculus under the four-factor test", wrote Kennedy.

He concluded that "The equitable discretion over injunctions, granted by the Patent Act, is well suited to allow courts to adapt to the rapid technological and legal developments in the patent system."

Robert Holleyman, P/CEO of the Business Software Alliance (BSA), stated in a release that "This decision is a clear victory for innovation and for consumers, and a defeat for patent trolls and others who are abusing the legal system.  By giving courts greater latitude on whether or not to issue an injunction, we are making progress towards restoring much needed balance to the out-of-control patent litigation process. As Justices Kennedy, Stevens, Souter, and Breyer recognized, automatic issuance of injunctions enables unscrupulous persons to coerce unjustified licensing payments."

He added that "While we are encouraged by the Court's ruling, we believe Congress still has an important role to play in this debate and in restoring additional balance by addressing other aspects of the litigation system that are being abused."

Emery Simon, a BSA attorney, spoke in a telephonic news conference. He said that the BSA still wants the Congress to address patent damages, and the first inventor to file principle.

This case is eBay Inc., et al. v. Mercexchange, LLC, Sup. Ct. No. 05-130, a petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, App. Ct. Nos. 03-1600 and 03-1616. Judge Bryson wrote the opinion of the Court of Appeals, in which Judges Michel and Clevenger joined. The Court of Appeals case is an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Judge Jerome Friedman presiding. See also, Supreme Court docket.

5/15. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Commissioner Michael Copps released a statement [PDF] regarding the article published on May 11, 2006, by the USA Today, titled "NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls", and its relation to the FCC CPNI proceeding.

The article, authored by Leslie Cauley, states that "The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY."

Commissioner Copps (at right) wrote that "Recent news reports suggest that some -- but interestingly not all -- of the nation's largest telephone companies have provided the government with their customers' calling records. There is no doubt that protecting the security of the American people is our government's number one responsibility. But in a Digital Age where collecting, distributing, and manipulating consumers' personal information is as easy as a click of a button, the privacy of our citizens must still matter."

He added that "To get to the bottom of this situation, the FCC should initiate an inquiry into whether the phone companies' involvement violated Section 222 or any other provisions of the Communications Act. We need to be certain that the companies over which the FCC has public interest oversight have not gone -- or been asked to go -- to a place where they should not be."

Section 222. 47 U.S.C. § 222(c) requires carriers to keep confidential the customer proprietary network information (CPNI) that they possess.

Commissioner Copps referred to this section in his statement. However, he was vague. For example, he wrote that "the FCC should initiate an inquiry". He was not clear as to whether he advocates opening a new proceeding and issuing a request for comments via a notice of inquiry (NOI), whether he advocates an inquiry by the FCC's Enforcement Bureau with reference to a possible enforcement action against the companies that have provided data to the NSA, whether he advocates expanding the scope of the FCC's ongoing Section 222 proceeding, or what.

The FCC adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in February. It was a delayed response to the August 30, 2005, petition for rulemaking filed by the Electronic Privacy Information Center's (EPIC). The FCC acted after substantial media reporting of sale of consumer phone records caused the Congress to take interest in the issue. (There is also pending legislation. See, for example, HR 4943, the "Prevention of Fraudulent Access to Phone Records Act".)

The FCC's open rulemaking proceeding is Docket No. 96-115 and RM-11277. The FCC adopted its NPRM on February 10, 2006. See, story titled "FCC Adopts NPRM Regarding Privacy of Consumer Phone Records" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,308, February 13, 2006. It released the text [34 pages in PDF] on February 14, 2006. The NPRM is FCC 06-10.

Second, he referenced "companies over which the FCC has public interest oversight". This skirts one of the questions at issue in the ongoing Section 222 proceeding. While Section 222 is clear that it applies only to a "telecommunications carrier", and the Communications Act defines this term, the FCC has a recent history of ignoring statutory definitions, and the meanings of words in the English language, to place companies and technologies within the category of "carriers" to suit its policy objectives, and to simultaneously place them outside of the category of "carriers" to suit its other policy objectives.

Moreover, the FCC has indicated that it might engage in further definitional shell games in its Section 222 proceeding. Its NPRM asks, "Should any requirements the Commission adopts in the context of the present rulemaking extend to VoIP service providers or other IP-enabled service providers?" It adds that "Our action pertains to VoIP services, which could be provided by entities that provide other services such as email, online gaming, web browsing, video conferencing, instant messaging, and other, similar IP-enabled services." See also, story titled "FCC Rulemaking Proceeding on CPNI May Extend to Internet Protocol Services" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,310, February 15, 2006.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) and other government agencies filed a comment [17 pages in PDF] with the FCC on April 28, 2006, in which they argued for expansion of the class of covered entities.

However, they went further, and asked for a data retention mandate. That is, the NPRM asked if the FCC should adopt a data destruction mandate. This had been recommended by the EPIC in its original petition for a rulemaking. The DOJ argued that "For law enforcement, such CPNI is an invaluable investigative resource, the mandatory destruction of which would severely impact the Departments' ability to protect national security and public safety."

However, the DOJ went even further, and suggested that records that are not now being collected must be collected and made available to the government. It wrote that "Today, many modern communications service providers maintain sensitive records about their customers' private communications, yet these new carriers have not been made subject to the rules that have traditionally governed CPNI. In addition, as carriers covered by the Commission's existing rules have increasingly moved away from classic billing models, in which charges are itemized and billed by type of service, to non-measured, bundled, and flat-rate service plans, some carriers have claimed that call records under such new plans are not covered by Section 42.6 because they are not ``toll records.´´ Therefore, these carriers have argued that no records need be retained. This has significantly diminished the availability of call records that were historically made available to law enforcement, pursuant to lawful process, as traditional ``billing records´´ under the Commission's rules."

The DOJ comment of April 28 may be related to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' speech on April 20. He advocated a data retention mandate for internet service providers. See, story titled "Gonzales Proposes Data Retention Mandate, Web Site Labeling, and Ban on Deceptive Source Code" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,357, April 25, 2006.

It appears that the DOJ seeks to convert Section 222, and the EPIC's petition for rulemaking, away from their purposes of protecting consumer privacy, into a record collection, retention, and distribution mandate, at the expense of consumer privacy.

Whether Commissioner Copps and the other FCC Commissioners will allow its implementation of the statute, and its rulemaking proceeding, to be so converted is yet to be seen.

Copps' Voting Record. While his rhetoric advocates the "privacy of our citizens" in the context of government access to records, his voting record at the FCC has been the opposite.

He has a record of voting for items that expand the surveillance and record collecting powers and capabilities of law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Moreover, most of these items include rules or declarations that are either without statutory authority, or are contrary to applicable statutes.

First, for example, Copps voted for the FCC's August 2004 CALEA NPRM & DR. See, story titled "FCC Adopts NPRM and Declaratory Ruling Regarding CALEA Obligations" and story titled "FCC Legislatively Expands Scope of CALEA Obligations" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 953, August 5, 2004; and series of articles in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert 960, August 17, 2004.

Second, Copps voted for the FCC's May, 2005, VOIP E911 order. See, stories titled "FCC Adopts Order Expanding E911 Regulation to Include Some VOIP Service Providers", "Summary of the FCC's 911 VOIP Order", "Opponents of FCC 911 VOIP Order State that the FCC Exceeded Its Statutory Authority", and "More Reaction to the FCC's 911 VOIP Order" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,139, May 20, 2005; and story titled "FCC Releases VOIP E911 Order" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,148, June 6, 2005.

Third, Copps voted for the FCC's August 5, 2005 CALEA order and NPRM. See, story titled "FCC Amends CALEA Statute" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,191, August 9, 2005.

Fourth, he voted for the FCC's August 5, 2005, policy statement [3 pages in PDF]. This statement addresses network freedoms of consumers, but includes an extraneous provision, "subject to the needs of law enforcement". See, story titled "FCC Adopts a Policy Statement Regarding Network Neutrality" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,190, August 8, 2005.

Fifth, he voted for the FCC's May 3, 2006, CALEA order.

5/15. Paul McNulty was sworn in as Deputy Attorney General. See, speech by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

5/15. David Meyer was named Deputy Assistant Attorney General (DAAG) in charge of civil enforcement at the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division (ATR). A DOJ release states that he will oversee three of the Division's civil sections. The ATR's organizational chart lists three sections in civil enforcement: Litigation I, Litigation II, and Litigation III. However, the ATR does not now follow its own organizational structure. The ATR web site states that "These sections assess the economic impact of proposed mergers in unregulated industries and act to clear the proposed mergers, negotiate a restructuring of the proposals, or file suit to block the mergers. They drive the Division's enforcement efforts by actively developing new, significant, and high-impact cases, including cases involving international markets. They also investigate and prosecute civil non-merger cases in all sectors of the economy."  The ATR organizational chart also provides that there is another DAAG in charge of regulatory matters who oversees the Telecommunications and Media Enforcement Section and the Networks and Technology Enforcement Section. An ATR spokesman told TLJ that "it hasn't been determined" which sections Meyer will oversee, and which sections DAAG Bruce McDonald will oversee. Meyer has worked since 1989 in the Washington DC office of the law firm of Covington & Burling (CB), in its Antitrust and Consumer Law Practice Group. He also worked at the ATR when Charles Rule was the AAG. See, CB release.

5/15. Greg Abbott, Attorney General of the State of Texas, named Judge Kent Sullivan (at right) to be the First Assistant Attorney General. Sullivan will begin on June 12. See, release. He was presiding judge of the 80th Judicial District Court of Harris County, which includes Houston. He previously worked for the law firm of Butler & Binion in Houston. He replaces Barry McBee, who will become Vice Chancellor for Governmental Affairs at the University of Texas system. The appointment may be significant because Texas has become active in technology related litigation in recent years. In March of this year, in Texas v. EMO, Texas filed a civil complaint [13 pages in PDF] in state court against EMO Corporation, and several of its officers and directors, alleging violation of the Texas Finance Code in connection with their alleged operation of an unlicensed internet payment service. See, story titled "Texas Sues to Shut Down Unlicensed Online Payment Service" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,329, March 14, 2006. Late last year, in Texas v. Sony BMG, Texas filed a civil complaint [14 pages in PDF] in state court regarding Sony BMG's sale of music CDs that install software on purchasers' computers, without notice to purchasers. See, story titled "Texas Sues Sony BMG Alleging Violation of Texas Spyware Statute" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,258, November 22, 2005, and story titled "Texas Amends Spyware Complaint Against Sony BMG" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,280, December 29, 2005. Earlier last year, in Texas v. Vonage, Texas filed a civil complaint [14 pages in PDF] in state court against Vonage alleging violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) in connection with Vonage's marketing and sale of voice over internet protocol (VOIP) service. The complaint alleged that Vonage engaged in deceptive marketing of its VOIP service by failing to clearly inform consumers of the difference between its 911 service and "traditional 911 service". See, story titled "Texas Sues Vonage Over Marketing of VOIP Service" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,101, March 23, 2005. Also, in 2004, Texas was a plaintiff in the failed lawsuit against Oracle seeking to block its acquisition of PeopleSoft on antitrust grounds. See, stories titled "DOJ Loses Oracle Case" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 974, September 10, 2004, and "Antitrust Division Sues Oracle to Enjoin Its Proposed Acquisition of PeopleSoft" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 846, March 1, 2004.

5/16. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published a notice in the Federal Register in which it requests public comments on patent search templates. These define the field of search, search tools, and search methodologies that should be considered each time a patent application is examined in a particular classification. The USPTO set no deadline for comments. See, Federal Register, May 16, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 94, Page 28309-28310.

5/16. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) published a notice in the Federal Register that states that it intends to publish a Request For Proposal (RFP) regarding outsourcing to private sector entities the management of national electronic fingerprint databases, and criminal history records checks. See, Federal Register, May 16, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 94, at Pages 28388-28389.

5/11. The Department of Commerce's (DOC) Technology Administration published a notice in the Federal Register that states that the Secretary of Commerce has renewed the Charter for the National Medal of Technology Nomination Evaluation Committee. See, Federal Register, May 11, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 91, at Page 27467. See also, stories titled "Bush Awards National Medals of Technology and Science" and "Commentary: National Medal of Technology Program" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,312, February 17, 2006.

5/10. The White House press office stated that President Bush created an identity theft task force. See, White House release and statement by Bush. See also, notice in the Federal Register, May 15, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 93, at Pages 27945-27947.

5/10. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a notice in the Federal Register that states that its Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee will meet on Wednesday, June 7, 2006, in San Francisco, California. See, Federal Register, May 10, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 90, at Pages 27266-27267. The DHS Privacy Office also published an agenda [PDF] in its web site.

The House will meet at 12:30 PM for morning hour, and at 2:00 PM for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 7:00 PM. The House will consider several non-technology related items under suspension of the rules. See, Republican Whip Notice.

The Senate will meet at 9:45 AM. It will first consider the nomination of Milan Smith to be a Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals (9thCir). It will then resume consideration of S 2611, the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006".

8:00 AM - 4:45 PM. The National Science Board will hold a meeting titled "Workshop on Fostering Transformative Research -- Views From Industry and Private Foundations". See, notice in the Federal Register: May 11, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 91, at Page 27521. Location: Room 1235, National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA.

10:00 AM. The Senate Finance Committee (SFC) will hold a hearing on the nomination of Susan Schwab to be the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR). See, notice. The SFC will then proceed to hold a hearing on proposed legislation implementing the U.S.-Oman Free Trade Agreement. See, notice. Location: Room 215, Dirksen Building.

10:30 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Heritage Foundation will host a panel discussion titled "Trade Is Better Than Aid: Tariff Relief Assistance for Least Developed Economies". The speakers will include Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-AZ). See, notice. Location: Heritage, 214 Massachusetts Ave., NE.

11:30 AM - 1:00 PM. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a continuing legal education (CLE) program titled "International Licensing: When Technology Crosses Borders". See, notice. Location: teleconference  and audio webcast only.

4:00 PM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property will hold an oversight hearing on discussion draft of HR __, the "Section 115 Reform Act (SIRA) of 2006". The HJC previously described this event as a hearing on the "Music Licensing for the Digital Age Act". The witnesses will be David Israelite (P/CEO of the National Music Publishers' Association), Jonathan Potter (Executive Director of the Digital Media Association), Rick Carnes (President of the Songwriter's Guild), and Cary Sherman (General Counsel of the Recording Industry Association of America). See, 17 U.S.C. § 115. See, notice. The hearing will be webcast by the HJC. Press contact: Jeff Lungren or Terry Shawn at 202-225-2492. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a panel discussion titled "Intellectual Property Primer". The speakers will include Joy Butler (Law Office of Joy Butler), Diana Michelle Sobo (Westerman Hattori Daniels & Adrian), Cathy Futrowsky (Gallop Johnson & Neuman), and Melinda Sossamon (Manning & Sossamon). The price to attend ranges from $10-$20. For more information, call 202-626-3463. See, notice. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) will host a continuing legal education (CLE) seminar titled "Communications Law 202". It will cover the broadcast and cable industries. Reservations and cancellations are due by May 12 at 12:00 NOON. Prices vary. See, registration form [PDF]. Location: Dow Lohnes, 1200 New Hampshire Ave., NW.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. See, Republican Whip Notice.

POSTPONED. 10:00 AM. The Senate Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Technology, Innovation, and Competitiveness will hold a hearing titled "Accelerating the Adoption of Health Information Technology". See, notice. Press contact: Aaron Saunders (Stevens) at 202-224-3991 or Andy Davis (Inouye) at 202-224-4546. Location: Room 562, Dirksen Building. This hearing has not yet been rescheduled.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Department of State's (DOS) International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet to prepare for the ITU Plenipotentiary Conference 2006 on November 6-24, 2006, in Ankara, Turkey. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 29, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 60, at Page 15798. Location: __.

10:00 AM. The U.S. District Court (DC) will hold a status conference in US v. Microsoft. This is D.C. No. 1-1998-cv-01232-CKK and 1-1998-cv-01233-CKK. Judge Colleen Kotelly will preside. Location: Courtroom 28A, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

11:30 AM - 1:30 PM. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce will host an event titled "Microsoft Cyber Security Forum". See, notice. Location: Sheraton National Hotel, 900 S. Orme Street, Arlington, VA.

12:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee will host a brown bag lunch to elect officers. E-mail nominations to Jason Friedrich at jason dot friedrich at dbr dot com or Natalie Roisman at natalie dot roisman at fcc dot gov by May 10. Location: Drinker Biddle & Reath, 1500 K Street, 11th floor.

2:00 - 4:00 PM. The Department of State's (DOS) International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet to prepare for the CITEL PCC.I (Telecommunication) meetings on May 23-26, 2006 in San Domingo, Dominican Republic, and on September 12-15, 2006, in Washington DC. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 29, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 60, at Page 15798. Location: __.

2:00 PM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law will hold a hearing titled "Privacy in the Hands of the Government: The Privacy Officer for the Department of Homeland Security and the Privacy Officer for the Department of Justice". See, notice. The hearing will be webcast by the HJC. Press contact: Jeff Lungren or Terry Shawn at 202-225-2492. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

2:00 PM. The House Financial Services Committee's (HFSC) Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology will hold a rescheduled hearing on HR 5337, the "Reform of National Security Reviews of Foreign Direct Investments Act". This pertains to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CIFIUS). The witnesses will include Stewart Baker (Department of Homeland Security). Location: Room 2128, Rayburn Building.

2:30 PM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law will meet to mark up HR 2840, the "Federal Agency Protection of Privacy Act of 2005". See, notice. The meeting will be webcast by the HJC. Press contact: Jeff Lungren or Terry Shawn at 202-225-2492. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) will host a conference titled "CLIX-COTS Logging Information Exchange". See, notice. Location: NIST, Green Auditorium, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding the National Exchange Carrier Association's (NECA) annual payment formula and fund size estimate for the Interstate TRS Fund. The NECA is the Interstate Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) Fund Administrator. This proceeding is CG Docket No. 03-123. See, notice in the Federal Register, May 10, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 90, at Pages 27252-27253.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. See, Republican Whip Notice.

9:00 AM. The House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, will hold a hearing on HR 5126, the "Truth in Caller ID Act of 2006". See, notice. Press contact: Larry Neal (Barton) at 202-225-5735, Terry Lane (Barton) at 202-225-5735, or Sean Bonyun (Upton) at 202-225-3761. The hearing will be webcast by the HCC. Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

9:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) may hold an executive business meeting. The SJC frequently cancels or postpones meetings without notice. See, notice. Press contact: 202-224-5225. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Commerce Committee (SCC) will hold the first of two hearings on S 2686 [135 pages in PDF], the "Communications, Consumer's Choice, and Broadband Deployment Act of 2006". See, notice of hearing, statement [5 pages in PDF] by Sen. Stevens, and Sen. Stevens' section by section summary [7 pages in PDF]. See also, stories titled "Stevens Introduces Telecom Reform Bill" and "Section by Section Summary of Sen. Stevens' Telecom Reform Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,362, May 2, 2006. There will be a panel of witnesses on video franchising. The witnesses will be Kyle McSlarrow, (National Cable & Telecommunications Association), Walter McCormick (U.S. Telecommunications Association), Michael Guido (U.S. Conference of Mayors), Julia Johnson (Video Access Alliance), Gene Kimmelman (Consumer's Union). There will also be a panel on universal service. The witnesses will be Shirley Bloomfield (National Telecommunications Cooperative Association), Walter McCormick (USTA), Kyle McSlarrow (NCTA), Steve Largent (CTIA), Joslyn Read (Satellite Industry Association), and Philip McClelland (Pennsylvania Office of Consumer Advocate). Press contact: Aaron Saunders (Stevens) at 202-224-3991 or Andy Davis (Inouye) at 202-224-4546. The hearing will be webcast by the SCC. Location: Room 216, Hart Building.

12:15 - 2:00 PM. The Council on Competitiveness's (COC) Forum on Technology and Innovation will host an event titled "Moving Ideas from the Lab to the Marketplace - the Role of Tech Transfer in an Innovative Economy". The program will begin at 12:30 PM. A box lunch will be served. Register by 5:00 PM on Tuesday, May 16, 2006, at registration web page. Location: Room G50, Dirksen Building, Capitol Hill.

12:00 NOON. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) will host a lunch featuring general counsels. Reservations and cancellations are due by May 15 at 5:00 PM. Prices vary. See, registration form [PDF]. Location: Mayflower Hotel, 1127 Connecticut Ave., NW.

2:00 - 4:00 PM. The Department of State's International Telecommunication Advisory Committee will meet to prepare for meetings of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) WPIE and CISP committee meetings of May 29-31, 2006. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 19, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 75, at Pages 20153-20154. Location: Room 2533, Harry Truman Building, 2201 C Street, NW.

3:00 PM. The Senate Judiciary Committee's (SJC) Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights will hold a hearing titled "AT&T and BellSouth Merger: What Does it Mean for Consumers?". Sen. Mike DeWine (R-OH) will preside. See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

Day one of a two day closed meeting of the Defense Science Board 2006 Summer Study on Information Management for Net-Centric Operations. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 11, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 69, Page 18292. Location: 3601 Wilson Boulevard, 3rd Floor, Arlington, VA.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to various petitions for reconsideration of the FCC's Report and Order regarding the equipment authorization requirements for Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure (U-NII) devices employing dynamic frequency selection (DFS). See, notice in the Federal Register, May 3, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 85, at Pages 26004-26006. This proceeding is ET Docket No. 03-122.

Deadline to submit comments to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) regarding Draft Special Publication 800-92 [64 pages in PDF], titled "Guide to Computer Security Log Management".

The House will meet at 9:00 AM for legislative business. See, Republican Whip Notice.

? TIME? The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) may host a panel discussion titled "Tracking Wireless Location Privacy: Who Knows Where You Are?" The scheduled speakers are Jed Rice (Skyhook Wireless, a Wi-fi positioning technology company), Michael Altschul (CTIA), Jim Smolen (WaveMarket, a wireless services and applications provider). See, notice. Location: __.

8:30 AM - 4:30 PM. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will host the Federal Circuit Judicial Conference. See, conference web site. The general registration fee is $225; government employee fee is $175; the late registration (after May 5) fee is $245. Location: Grand Hyatt Washington, 1000 H Street, NW.

Day two of a two day closed meeting of the Defense Science Board 2006 Summer Study on Information Management for Net-Centric Operations. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 11, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 69, Page 18292. Location: 3601 Wilson Boulevard, 3rd Floor, Arlington, VA.

Extended deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding privacy of consumer phone records. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 15, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 50, at Pages 13317-13323. See also, notice of extension [PDF]. The FCC adopted this NPRM on February 10, 2006, and released the text [34 pages in PDF] on February 14, 2006. See, story titled "FCC Adopts NPRM Regarding Privacy of Consumer Phone Records" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,308, February 13, 2006, and story titled "FCC Rulemaking Proceeding on CPNI May Extend to Internet Protocol Services" in TLJ Daily E-Mail alert No. 1,310, February 15, 2006. This NPRM is FCC 06-10 in CC Docket No. 96-115 and RM-11277.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding the petition of the Georgia Public Service Commission (GPSC) for a declaratory ruling that the GPSC is not preempted by federal law from regulating rates under 47 U.S.C. § 271 for local switching, high capacity loops and transport, and line sharing. See, FCC notice [PDF]. This is WC Docket No. 06-90.

12:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee and Common Carrier Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The topic will be "An Introduction To Intercarrier Compensation: Past, Present, and Future". The speakers will be Don Stockdale (Associate Bureau Chief of the FCC's Wireline Competition Bureau), John Nakahata (Harris Wiltshire), Jon Nuechterlein (Wilmer Hale), and Eric Einhorn (AT&T). Location: Wiley Rein & Fielding, 1776 K St., NW.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding ACA International's petition for an expedited clarification and declaratory ruling concerning the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) rules. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 26, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 80, at Pages 24634-24635. This is CG Docket No. 02-278.

9:00 - 11:00 AM. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) will host a panel discussion titled "U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement: Building on Success". See, notice. Location: AEI, 12th floor, 1150 17th St., NW.

9:30 AM - 5:00 PM. The Antitrust Modernization Commission (AMC) will hold a public meeting to deliberate on possible recommendations regarding the antitrust laws. The AMC states that preregistration by 12:00 NOON on May 22 is a prerequisite for attendance. Contact: 202-233-0701. See, notice in the Federal Register, May 8, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 88, at Pages 26735. Location: Morgan Lewis, Main Conference Room, 1111 Pennsylvania, Ave., NW.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Department of State's (DOS) International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet to prepare for the CITEL PCC.II (Radiocommunication including Broadcasting) meetings on June 20-23, 2006, in Lima, Peru, and on October 17-20, 2006, in San Salvador, El Salvador. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 29, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 60, at Page 15798. Location: __.

RESCHEDULED FOR JUNE 22. 2:00 PM. The House Ways and Means Committee's Subcommittee on Select Revenue Measures will hold a hearing titled "Hearing on the Impact of International Tax Reform on U.S. Competitiveness". See, notice. Location: Room 1100, Longworth Building.

6:00 - 8:00 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee will host an event titled "Happy Hour". For more information, contact Natalie Roisman at natalie dot roisman at fcc dot gov. Location: Georgia Brown's, 950 15th Street, NW (between I and K Streets, NW).

Tech Law Journal publishes a free access web site and subscription e-mail alert. The basic rate for a subscription to the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert is $250 per year. However, there are discounts for subscribers with multiple recipients. Free one month trial subscriptions are available. Also, free subscriptions are available for journalists, federal elected officials, and employees of the Congress, courts, and executive branch. The TLJ web site is free access. However, copies of the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert are not published in the web site until one month after writing. See, subscription information page.

Contact: 202-364-8882.
P.O. Box 4851, Washington DC, 20008.

Privacy Policy
Notices & Disclaimers
Copyright 1998 - 2006 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All rights reserved.