9/18. The U.S. Court of Appeals (4thCir) issued its opinion [83 pages in PDF] in Bland v. Roberts, a case regarding First Amendment free speech rights, and alleged retaliation by an elected official by not reappointing employees who spoke in support of the opponent's candidacy, including by clicking on a like button in the Facebook web page of the opponent.

(The Court made a minor correction to its opinion on September 23.)

The District Court granted summary judgment against the plaintiffs. The Court of Appeals reversed the grant of summary judgment, reinstated the plaintiffs' claims, and remanded to the District Court.

This lengthy opinion addresses many issues related to retaliation against government employees. However, the one issue addressed by the Court that is of significance to technology relates whether clicking a "like" button for the Facebook web page of a political candidate constitutes Constitutionally protected free speech under the 1st Amendment.

The District Court held that "merely 'liking' a Facebook page is insufficient speech to merit constitutional protection". The Court of Appeals concluded otherwise. It is both pure speech and symbolic speech, and warrants protection.

It wrote that "``Liking´´ on Facebook is a way for Facebook users to share information with each other." It elaborated that when one of the plaintiffs visited the Facebook webpage of the opposing candidate, "which was named ``Jim Adams for Hampton Sheriff," and he clicked the ``like´´ button on the Campaign Page. When he did so, the Campaign Page's name and a photo of Adams -- which an Adams campaign representative had selected as the Page's icon -- were added to Carter’s profile, which all Facebook users could view. On Carter’s profile, the Campaign Page name served as a link to the Campaign Page. Carter’s clicking on the ``like´´ button also caused an announcement that Carter liked the Campaign Page to appear in the news feeds of Carter’s friends. And it caused Carter’s name and his profile photo to be added to the Campaign Page’s ``People [Who] Like This´´ list."

The Court of Appeals offered this analysis. "In the context of a political campaign's Facebook page, the meaning that the user approves of the candidacy whose page is being liked is unmistakable. That a user may use a single mouse click to produce that message that he likes the page instead of typing the same message with several individual key strokes is of no constitutional significance."

"Aside from the fact that liking the Campaign Page constituted pure speech, it also was symbolic expression. The distribution of the universally understood "thumbs up" symbol in association with Adams's campaign page, like the actual text that liking the page produced, conveyed that Carter supported Adams’s candidacy."

The Court of Appeals concluded that "liking a political candidate’s campaign page communicates the user's approval of the candidate and supports the campaign by associating the user with it. In this way, it is the Internet equivalent of displaying a political sign in one’s front yard, which the Supreme Court has held is substantive speech."

Judge Hollander dissented in part on the issue of qualified immunity.

This case is Bobby Bland, et al. v. B.J. Roberts, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, App. Ct. No. 12-1671, an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, D.C. No. 4:11-cv-00045-RAJ-TEM, Judge Raymond Jackson presiding. Judge Traxler wrote the opinion of the Court of Appeals, in which Judge Thacker joined. Judge Hollander dissented in part.

9/18. The House passed HR 761 [LOC | WW], the "National Strategic and Critical Minerals Production Act of 2013", a bill that would have the effect of facilitating domestic mining and extraction of rare earth materials (REMs), which are used in information and communications technology (ICT) products. Republicans voted unanimously for the bill. Most Democrats voted against.

Outline of this Article.
   1. Introduction.
   2. Rare Earths.
   3. Bill Summary.
   4. Floor Debate.
   5. Amendments.
   6. Analysis of Votes.
   7. Conclusion.

1. Introduction. Currently, many applications for mineral extraction permits are blocked, not by final orders of administrative agencies, but by continuous delays by agencies. Many oppose mining operations in the U.S. for environmental reasons, and are content with this regime.

A key provision of this bill would set a time limit of 30 months for government review of permit applications for strategic and critical minerals projects. Other provisions of the bill are directed at facilitating final determinations on the merits in a timely manner.

During floor debate, Republicans emphasized the importance of REMs to ICT products. However, while this bill would accelerate the permitting process for REMs, it would also affect a wide range of other materials that could be deemed critical, including sand and gravel. Democrats focused on this aspect of the bill during floor debate. Republicans defeated proposed amendments that would have narrowed the scope of the bill.

Proponents of the bill also stressed the impact that this bill would have on mining jobs and income in the US. However, this is not just a matter of mining jobs in the US. Currently, almost all REMs are being produced in the People's Republic of China (PRC). Several years ago the PRC began to use its national dominance to favor domestic producers, discriminate against foreign competitors, and leverage technology transfers, to the detriment not only of US ICT and other industry sectors that use REMS, and the consumers of their products, but also producers and consumers in other countries. Not only the US, but also Japan and the European Union, have filed complaints with the World Trade Orgnanization (WTO) regarding the PRC's REM related practices.

The Senate has not yet passed this bill. There is no companion bill in the Senate. Democratic control of the Senate may preclude Senate consideration of this bill. However, Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) is the Senate Majority Leader. All four Nevada Representatives -- two Republicans and two Democrats -- voted for the House bill. Nevada is a mining state, and Las Vegas is just across state lines from a major mining site with deposits of rare earth elements.

There have been related bills in the Senate. See for example, from the 112th Congress, S 1113 [LOC | WW], the "Critical Minerals Policy Act of 2011", sponsored by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK).

President Obama's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not released a public statement of support or opposition.

See also, story titled "House to Take Up Rare Earths Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,601, September 16, 2013.

2. Rare Earths. The rare earth elements from which REMs are made are sometimes listed as Scandium, Yttrium, Lanthanum, Cerium, Praseodymium, Neodymium, Promethium, Samarium, Europium, Gadolinium, Terbium, Dysprosium, Holmium, Erbium, Thulium, Ytterbium, and Lutetium. See also, periodic table.

Rare earth elements are found around the US and the world. For the location of rare earths element deposits, see table titled "Classification of Rare Earth Elements-Bearing Mineral Deposits" in Geology.com's web page titled "The Geology of Rare Earth Elements". This web page republishes U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) data.

REMs have a wide range of uses. For example, they are used in fiber optic cable and smart phone screens. However, one of their keys uses is in making permanent magnets, which have the properties of compactness, high strength, and very strong magnetic fields. These magnets are used in computer hard drives, cell phones, loudspeakers, headphones, magnetic resonance imaging, cordless electric tools, and other products.

Neodymium is used in permanent magnets. Holmium, Erbium, Ytterbium and other rare earth elements are used in doping fiber optic cables.

TLJ stories do not address REM's many uses in defense, aviation, and green technologies.

3. Bill Summary. The bill is directed at promoting agencies involved in permitting mining projects to reach a determination on the merits in an expeditious manner.

It provides that "In no case should the total review process ... exceed 30 months unless agreed to by the signatories of the agreement". This refers to an agreement entered into by the project proponent and the government agencies involved.

It further provides that "The lead agency with responsibility for issuing a mineral exploration or mine permit shall appoint a project lead who shall coordinate and consult with cooperating agencies and any other agency involved in the permitting process, project proponents and contractors to ensure that agencies minimize delays, set and adhere to timelines and schedules for completion of the permitting process, set clear permitting goals and track progress against those goals."

Similarly, it provides that this lead agency "shall enhance government coordination for the permitting process by avoiding duplicative reviews, minimizing paperwork and engaging other agencies and stakeholders early in the process."

The bill addresses the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. This Act, which is also known as the NEPA, was enacted in 1969, and is now codified at 42 U.S.C. § 4321, et seq.. It requires federal agencies to identify and take into account environmental effects when deciding whether to authorize or undertake a major federal action. It is also the statute that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) invokes when it considers the impact of licensing communications towers on birds.

The bill would impose limits upon, but not terminate its application of, the NEPA to the critical materials permitting process.

The bill provides that "To the extent that the" NEPA "applies to any mineral exploration or mine permit, the lead agency with responsibility for issuing a mineral exploration or mine permit shall determine that the action to approve the exploration or mine permit does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 if the procedural and substantive safeguards of the permitting process alone, any applicable State permitting process alone, or a combination of the two processes together provide an adequate mechanism to ensure that environmental factors are taken into account."

4. Floor Debate. Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT) spoke in support of the bill during floor debate. He emphasized the importance of "critical minerals" to "our weapons development system, including such things as night vision equipment, advanced lasers, avionics, fighter jet components, missile guidance systems".

But, he also said that "if you have an iPhone or an iPad or any of that other kind of new stuff that my kids like to have, you're going to have these critical minerals. And if we are not proposing and developing them here in the United States, we are paying more to develop them out of country, and we're putting ourselves, manufacturing-wise, in a significant deficit situation."

He added that development of resources in the U.S. "has actually been stymied by a combination of special interest politics, as well as bureaucratic red tape, particularly under this administration."

Rep. Doc Hastings (R-WA) said that "Not a day goes by when Americans don't use a product that is made from critical minerals. In fact, life as we know it in the 21st century would not be possible without these minerals. There would be no computers, no Blackberrys or iPhones."

"Rare-earth elements, a special subset of strategic and critical minerals, are core components of these products in the 21st century. Yet despite the tremendous need for rare-earth elements, the United States has allowed itself to become almost entirely dependent on China and other foreign nations for these resources."

Rep. Hastings (at right) continued that "America has a plentiful supply of rare-earth elements, but roadblocks to the development of these crucial materials have resulted in China producing 97 percent of the world's supply. Our current policies are handing China a monopoly on these elements, creating a dependence that has serious implications on American jobs, on our economy, and on our national security."

He said that the problems are that "Burdensome red tape, duplicative reviews, frivolous lawsuits, and onerous regulations can hold up new mining projects here in the U.S. for more than 10 years."

The other Hastings, Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL), said that this bill "guts important environmental protections".

Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) argued that "despite the bill's title, it has almost nothing to do with national strategic and critical minerals production. In fact, under the guise of promoting the development of minerals critical to the United States' national security, this legislation would reshape mining decisions on public lands for almost all minerals."

Rep. Holt (at right) said, "Make no mistake, this bill is a giveaway. It is free mining, no royalties, no protection of public interest, exemption from royalty payments, near exemption from environmental regulations, near exemption from legal enforcement of the protections." He suggested instead "legislation that makes those available for manufacturing needs, for national security needs, rather than having a catch-all mining definition".

Rep. Pete DeFazio (D-OR) stated that "these critical minerals are not critical. Sand and gravel are now critical."

Rep. Mark Amodei (R-NV), the sponsor of the bill, addressed sand and gravel. "Even sand and gravel and other construction mineral materials can be in short supply or not available, as the USGS discovered in 2009 during the great California shakeout. What they discovered during that was that, in its assessment of scope and damage and materials needed for construction in the event of a large-scale earthquake, USGS discovered there were not enough sand, gravel, and other construction materials available in the region to meet the affected area's reconstruction needs."

5. Amendments. The House Republican leadership allowed a relatively open process. The House Rules Committee (HRC) made in order four amendments offered by Democrats. All were rejected on roll call votes. The House passed one Republican amendment by voice vote.

First, the House rejected an amendment [2 pages in PDF] regarding the meaning of critical minerals offered by Rep. Alan Lowenthal (D-CA). The vote was 187-241. See, Roll Call No. 466.

It would have defined "strategic and critical minerals" to mean "minerals and mineral groups identified as critical by the National Research Council in the report entitled ``Minerals, Critical Minerals, and the U.S. Economy´´, dated 2008", and "additional minerals identified by the Secretary of the Interior based on the National Research Council criteria in such report", but not "shall not include sand, gravel, or clay".

This 264 page report is on sale for $39 in paper. It is also available online for free in an awkward format.

Rep. Holt quipped that "China is not trying to lock up the world's sand and gravel", and these are not necessary for "for jet engines and magnets and hard drives in laptops".

Second, the House rejected a similar amendment [1 page in PDF] offered by Rep. Marc Veasey (D-TX) that would have given the Secretary of Interior the authority to decide what are the strategic and critical minerals covered by the bill. The vote was 189-237. See, Roll Call No. 467.

Third, the House rejected an amendment [1 page in PDF] offered by Rep. Gerald Connolly (D-VA) by a vote of 186-240. See, Roll Call No. 468.

This amendment would have removed from the bill the above quoted language that would limit the application of the NEPA in the case of applications involving critical materials. It would also have added a mandate that the agency make a finding that any such project significantly affects "the quality of the human environment" within the meaning of the NEPA.

Fourth, the House rejected an amendment [1 page in PDF] offered by Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) by a vote of 191-235. See, Roll Call No. 469.

This bill includes a provision that states that the permitting agency "will" require "financial assurance for reclamation of a mineral exploration or mining site". The amendment would have provided that this assurance must include "a surety bond, letter of credit, or other instrument", and that the agency must conduct "annual inspections and reviews of financial insurance".

Finally, the House approved by voice vote an amendment [1 page in PDF] offered by Rep. Stevan Pearce (R-NM). There are many rare earth elements deposits in his southern New Mexico district. His amendment is little significance, except in the Permian Basin area of west Texas, where both potash and oil and gas is developed. Potash, which contains potassium, is used in fertilizers. It is not a rare earth element, and it has no significance for ICT.

The amendment provides that "Nothing in this Act shall be construed as to affect any aspect of Secretarial Order 3324, issued by the Secretary of the Interior on December 3, 2012, with respect to potash and oil and gas operators."

6. Analysis of the Votes. The final vote was 246-178. See, Roll Call No. 471. The vote broke down along partisan lines. Republicans voted 231-0. Democrats voted 15-178. Four roll votes on amendments offered by Democrats were all nearly identical to the final vote.

Most of the debate was conducted by only a few Democratic opponents, and a few Republican proponents. There was no broad participation in the debate.

Urban and suburban Democrats voted against the bill. The Democrats who voted for the bill mostly represent large districts in which mineral extraction, forestry, and agricultural activities are major components of the local economy.

Seven of the fifteen Democrats who voted yes are black, hispanic or asian. Some of the fifteen are blue dogs.

Notably, while this bill would ultimately benefit tech companies, none of the Silicon Valley area delegation, which is all Democrats, voted for this bill.

Republicans who represent districts that are home to REM users voted for the bill. For example, REMs are used in making fiber optic cable, and Corning makes fiber optic cable. Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY), who represents Corning, New York, voted for the bill, as did upstate Democrat Rep. Bill Owens (D-NY). Rep. Dan Maffei (D-NY), another upstate Democrat, did not vote for the bill, but voted against some of the Democrats' amendments to water down the bill.

Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV), who represents Las Vegas, Nevada, and Rep. Steven Horsford (D-NV), who represents a large Nevada district, both voted for the bill. Molycorp, Inc. has a rare earth elements mining facility in Mountain Pass, California, which is just across the border from nearby Las Vegas. See, story titled "Molycorp and Hitachi Plan Joint Ventures for Production of Rare Earth Magnets" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,189, December 29, 2010.

Colorado is also a mining state, with many rare earth elements deposits. Molycorp is based in Colorado. Three of the seven Representatives are Democrats. Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO) did not vote. Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-CO) did not vote for the bill, but voted against some of the Democrats' amendments. Rep. Diane DeGette (D-CO) voted for the bill and the Democrats' amendments.

Two Democrats who represent large districts in the mining state of Minnesota, Rep. Nick Nolan (D-MN) and Rep. Colin Peterson (D-MN), both voted for the bill.

Hispanic Democrats of south and west Texas voted for the bill. Rep. Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) represents a south Texas district stretching from the outskirts of San Antonio to Laredo and the Rio Grand Valley. Rep. Filemon Vela (D-TX) represents another south Texas district. Rep. Pete Gallego (D-TX) represents a huge west Texas district stretching from suburbs of San Antonio to just outside of El Paso.

The Texas Rare Earth Resources Corp., aka TRER, has hopes of developing its Round Top facility, which is located in Rep. Gallego's district. See, TRER's release on passage of this bill. This TRER facility would produce Beryllium and Uranium. Beryllium is important to making metal alloys used in high speed aircraft and communications satellites. It is also commonly used in X-ray equipment because it is transparent to X-rays.

Rep. Jim Costa (D-CA), who represents the San Joaquin Valley, was the only California Democrat to vote for the bill. Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT) also voted for the bill.

Rep. Mike McIntyre (D-NC) voted for the bill. There are rare earth elements deposits in North Carolina, but at the opposite end of the state from his district.

Rep. Grace Meng (D-NY) of Queens, New York, was the only big city Democrat (other than Las Vegas's Rep. Titus) to vote for the bill. She is of Chinese ancestry.

Rep. John Barrow (D-GA), Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-GA), and Rep. Terri Sewell (D-AL) also voted for the bill.

Three Democrats did not vote for the bill, but did oppose one or more of the amendments offered by Democrats: Rep. Perlmutter (D-CO), Rep. Maffei (D-NY), and Rep. Joe Garcia (D-FL).

7. Conclusion. This bill, if enacted into law, would promote the production of REMs critical to making ICT products. It would benefit ICT companies in the US, Japan, EU and elsewhere by providing competition to the PRC, and by taking away from the PRC the ability to abuse its dominant position in REM production.

However, voting does not appear to have been driven by this concern. Rather, proponents were driven by a goal of reducing permitting delays across a wide range of mining projects. Opponents were driven by a goal of maintaining the status quo for all mining projects. Republicans talked about ICT, but voted for mining generally.

To illustrate this, members could have voted for Rep. Lowenthal's amendment (which would have clarified that sand and gravel extraction are not covered by the bill) without undermining the goal of the bill to restart production of critical REMs in the US.

But, almost no one did. Not a single Republican voted for the Lowenthal amendment, and only a few of the Democrats who voted for the bill also voted for this amendment.

Based upon these two roll call votes, only five members can claim to have backed legislative language that would both eased permitting delays on critical REMs, without also granting broad relief to other mining projects -- Rep. Horsford, Rep. Meng, Rep. Gallego, Rep. Costa, and Rep. Sewell.

Also, arguably, voting for the Connolly amendment would have undermined efforts to mine some sites that contain critical REMs. All of these five voted for the Connolly amendment.

Finally, while Republicans insisted on a bill broader than necessary to restart product of critical REMs for ICT, and minerals critical for defense, Democrats did not introduce an alternative bill that would have had this narrow impact. Also, notably absent from the lengthy debate was statements from Democrats that they would vote for a narrowly drafted bill.

9/24. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released an updated agenda on September 19 for its event on Thursday, September 26, 2013 titled "Open Meeting". It contains all four of the items that were listed on the tentative agenda released on September 5. These four items pertain to antenna structure registration (ASR) and birds, media ownership, Bloomberg v. Comcast and LPFM. See also, story titled story titled "FCC Announces Tentative Agenda for September 26 Meeting" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,596, September 5, 2013. The updated agenda adds consideration of a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding "resiliency of mobile wireless networks during emergencies". FCC Chairman Mignon Clyburn described this item in a speech on September 24. She said that this NPRM "proposes to improve wireless network reliability during disasters by requiring wireless service providers to publicly disclose the percentage of cell sites within their networks that are operational after disasters. This proposal, now on the agenda for the next open meeting, could encourage competition in the wireless industry to improve network reliability by providing consumers with a yardstick for comparing wireless performance in emergencies."

9/24. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Mignon Clyburn gave a speech [13 pages in PDF] in Washington DC. She spoke in broad and vague terms about numerous topics, including expansion of the FCC's e-rate tax and subsidy programs, the H block auction scheduled for January, upcoming incentive auctions, AWS-3, interoperability in the 700 MHz band, special services, cell phone unlocking, inmate rates, rural call completion, disability access, resiliency of wireless networks during disasters, and wireless location surveillance mandates.

9/20. President Obama released a memorandum that sets forth the order of succession in the event of the death or incapacity of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI). See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 186, September 25, 2013, at Pages 59159-59160.

9/19. John McCoskey joined the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) as Executive Vice President and Chief Technology Officer (CTO). He was previously CTO for the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). In addition, Alex Deacon joined the MPAA as Senior Vice President, Internet Technology. He will be based in Silicon Valley, California. See, MPAA release.

The House will meet at 12:00 NOON for morning hour, and at 2:00 PM for legislative business. It will consider several non-technology related items under suspension of the rules. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 PM. See, Rep. Cantor's schedule.

9:00 - 10:30 AM. The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (ITIF) will host a panel discussion titled "Confronting Global Anti-Competitive Market Distortions". The speakers will be Stephen Ezell (ITIF), Robert Atkinson (ITIF), Edward Alden (Council on Foreign Relations), and Shanker Singham (Squire Sanders). Free. Open to the public. See, notice. Location: ITIF/ITIC, Suite 610A, 1101 K St., NW.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The Venable law firm will host an on site and webcast panel discussion titled "Cyber Sticks and Carrots -- How the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, Incentives, and the SAFETY Act Affect You". The speakers will be Jamie Barnett (Venable), Jane Lute (Council on Cybersecurity), Dismas Locaria (Venable), and Jason Wool (Venable). Lunch will be served. See, notice. Location: Venable, 575 7th St., NW.

2:30 PM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) will hold a hearing on three pending judicial nominees: Carolyn McHugh (to be a Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals (10thCir)), Vince Chhabria (USDC/NDCal), and James Moody (USDC/EDArk). The SJC will provide a live and archived webcast. See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

4:00 - 5:30 PM. The American Bar Association's (ABA) Division for Public Education and the Woodrow Wilson Center (WWC) will host a panel discussion titled "The Legal and Media World's Look at the 2013-2014 Supreme Court Term". The speakers will be John Milewski (WWC), Renee Landers (Suffolk University Law School), David Salmons (Bingham McCutchen), David Savage (Los Angeles Times), and Stephen Wermiel (American University law school). Free. Open to the public. See, notice. Location: WWC, Flom Auditorium, Ronald Reagan Building, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.

11:59 PM. Deadline to submit comments to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (OUSTR) regarding the Interim Environmental Review [89 pages in PDF] of the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA). See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 167, August 28, 2013, at Pages 53183-53184.

Deadline to submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding mobile device location surveillance capabilities and precision in advance of its October 2, 2013 workshop. See, FCC Public Notice (DA 13-1873 in PS Docket No. 07-114) and stories titled "FCC Seeks Comments on Mobile Device Location Surveillance Capabilities" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,598, September 10, 2013, and "California House Democrats Urge FCC to Amend Phone Location Detection Rules" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,600, September 12, 2013.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for morning hour, and at 12:00 NOON for legislative business. See, Rep. Cantor's schedule.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) will hold an executive business meeting. The agenda includes consideration of S 42 [LOC | WW], the "Criminal Antitrust Anti-Retaliation Act of 2013". This bill would prohibit retaliation against a whistleblower because he reported to the federal government what he reasonably believes to be a violation of the antitrust laws. The agenda also includes consideration of numerous judicial nominees: Judge Robert Wilkins (to be a Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir)), James Donato (USDC/NDCal), Beth Freeman (USCD/NDCal), Brian Davis (USDC/MDFl), Timothy Brooks (USDC/WDArk), and Pedro Delgado Hernandez (USDC/DPR). The agenda also includes consideration of the nomination of Patricia Wald to be a member of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB). The Pillard nomination is part of President Obama's plan to pack the DC Circuit. See, story titled "Obama Launches Effort to Pack the DC Circuit" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,570, June 4, 2013. Webcast. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:30 AM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will host an event titled "open meeting". See, tentative agenda, and story titled "FCC Announces Tentative Agenda for September 26 Meeting" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,596, September 5, 2013. Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room, TW-C305, 445 12th St., SW.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a panel discussion titled "FTC v. Actavis: What Next Now That The Court Held That The Rule Of Reason Governs ANDA Settlements?". See, Supreme Court's June 17, 2013 opinion [43 pages in PDF] in FTC v. Actavis, and stories titled "Supreme Court Holds Patent Reverse Payments Can Violate Antitrust Law", "Reaction to the Actavis Opinion" and "Commentary: Potential Impact of the Actavis Opinion on Other FTC and DOJ Antitrust Actions" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,580, June 19, 2013. The speakers will be Bill Blumenthal (Sidley Austin), Eric Grannon (White & Case), Michael Kades (FTC), Andrew Lazerow (Covington & Burling), and Sean O'Donnell. The price to attend ranges from $25 to $35. No reporters. No CLE credits. No webcast. For more information, call 202-626-3463. See, notice. Location: DC Bar Conference Center, 1101 K St., NW.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Privacy and Data Security Committee will host an event titled "The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -- What's Working and What Needs Fixing". The speakers will be David Valdez (FCC), Sam Simon (office of Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)), Michelle Richardson (ACLU), Harriet Pearson (Hogan Lovells), Douglas Bonner (Drinker Biddle & Reath), Marc Zwillinger (ZwillGen), and Alan Butler (Electronic Privacy Information Center). CLE credits. Prices vary. See, notice. Location: Drinker Biddle & Reath, 1500 K St., NW.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding Purple Communications' July 11, 2013 Emergency Petition for Limited Waiver [6 pages in PDF], in connection with FCC's VRS reform order, due to other providers of IP Relay service exiting the IP Relay marketplace. See, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [160 pages in PDF] adopted on June 7, 2013, and released on June 10, 2013. It is FCC in 13-82 in CG Docket Nos. 10-51 and 03-123. See, also the FCC's August 27, 2013 Public Notice (DA 13-1814), and notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 176, September 11, 2013, at Pages 55696-55697.

The House will meet at 9:00 AM for legislative business. See, Rep. Cantor's schedule.

9:00 - 10:30 AM. The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (ITIF) will host a panel discussion titled "The Internet Protocol Transition: Where Do We Stand?". The speakers will be Richard Bennett (ITIF), Robert Atkinson (ITIF), John Bergmayer (Public Knowledge), Blair Levin (Aspen Institute), Prabir Neogi (Carlton University), and David Young (Verizon). Free. Open to the public. See, notice. Location: ITIF/ITIC, Suite 610A, 1101 K St., NW.

9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in Agape Church v. FCC, App. Ct. No. 12-1334. This is a petition for review of a final order of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding must carry mandates imposed upon broadcasters by 47 U.S.C. § 534. See also, FCC brief filed on February 14, 2013. Judges Kavanaugh, Edwards, and Williams will preside. This is the first item on the Court's agenda. Location: USCA Courtroom 11, 4th floor, Prettyman Courthouse, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

12:15 - 1:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Mobile Payments Committee will host a brown bag lunch titled "The Five Things You Need to Know About Mobile Payments". The speakers will be Heather Allen (FTC), Henning Schulzrinne (FCC), and Jacqueline Kolego (Verizon). For more information, contact Brooks Harlow (Lukas Nace) at bharlow at fcclaw.com or Mark Brennan at mark dot brennan at hoganlovells dot com. Location: Electronic Transactions Association, 1101 16th St., NW.

Deadline to file initial submissions with the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) in its Section 337 exclusion proceeding initiated by InterDigital Communications against Huawei, Futurewei, Nokia and ZTE involving 3G wireless devices. The administrative law judge filed his determination on June 28, 2013 finding no violation of Section 337. The USITC then decided to review this determination in its entirety. It seeks comments on whether establishing a domestic industry based on licensing under 19 U.S.C. § 1337 (a)(3)(C) requires proof of ``articles protected by the patent´´, and if so, whether there is evidence in the record that establishes articles protected by the asserted patents. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 175, September 10, 2013, at Pages 55294-55296.

Deadline to submit to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) petitions to deny and comments on AT&T's planned acquisition of Leap Wireless. See, FCC August 28, 2013 Public Notice (DA 13-1831 in WT Docket No. 13-193). See also, the FCC's Office of General Counsel's (OGC) web page for this merger review.

Deadline to submit to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) challenges in connection with the FCC's notice that lists all census blocks that price cap carriers have requested funding to serve as part of the second round of Connect America Phase I, and that announces the start of the Phase I challenge process to determine whether or not the requested census blocks are unserved. See, FCC's August 29, 2013 Public Notice (DA 13-1832 in WC Docket No. 10-90).

The Supreme Court will hold its opening conference for its October Term 2013.

11:30 AM. The Library of Congress (LOC) will host a lecture by Orin Kerr (George Washington University law school, on leave at the LOC) on his article [SSRN] titled "The Next Generation Communications Privacy Act". It proposes an overhaul of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA). See, notice. Location: LOC, Madison Building, Montpelier Room, 6th floor, 101 Independence Ave., SE.

4:00 PM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial, and Antitrust Law will hold a hearing titled "The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs: Federal Regulations and Regulatory Reform". The witnesses will be __. Webcast. See, notice. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

Deadline to submit comments to the Department of Commerce's (DOC) Census Bureau regarding its proposal to collect data for its Current Population Survey (CPS) via e-mail. The CPS is used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) to prepare monthly reports on employment and unemployment. Some economists argue that the current questionnaire and survey methods produce inaccurate estimates. The DOC's notice in the Federal Register (FR) requesting comments states that "Over the last few years, CPS, like many surveys, has seen response rates declining slowly", in part because "interviewers are unable to make contact with the respondent See, FR, Vol. 78, No. 146, July 30, 2013, at Pages 45910-45911.

EXTENDED TO DECEMBER 4. Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) regarding whether the FCC should "require apparatus manufacturers to ensure that their apparatus synchronize the appearance of closed captions with the display of the corresponding video". This FNPRM is FCC 13-84 in MB Docket No. 11-154. The FCC adopted this item on June 13, 2013, and released the text on June 14. See, original notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 127, July 2, 2013, at Pages 39691-39698. See also, Public Notice (DA 13-1785) extending deadlines, and extension notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 172, September 5, 2013, at Page 54612. See also, story titled "FCC Again Addresses Closed Captioning Mandates for Video Programming Delivered Using IP" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,578, June 17, 2013.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding spectrum allocations for space related purposes. This NPRM makes two alternative proposals to modify the Allocation Table to provide interference protection for Fixed-Satellite Service (FSS) and Mobile Satellite Service (MSS) earth stations operated by federal agencies under authorizations granted by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) in certain frequency bands. This NPRM also proposes to amend a footnote to the Allocation Table to permit a Federal MSS system to operate in the 399.9-400.05 MHz band, and makes alternative proposals to modify the Allocation Table to provide access to spectrum on an interference protected basis to FCC licensees for use during the launch of launch rockets. This item is FCC 13-65 in ET Docket No. 13-115. The FCC adopted and released this item on May 9, 2013. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 126, July 1, 2013, at Pages 39200-39232.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) [38 pages in PDF] regarding speech to speech relay service by persons with speech disabilities. This FNPRM is FCC 13-101 in CG Docket Nos. 08-15 and 03-123. The FCC adopted and released this FNPRM on July 19, 2013. See, Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 158, August 15, 2013, at Pages 49717-49720.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that refresh the FCC's record regarding property records for rate of return carriers. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 157, August 14, 2013, at Pages 49420-49422. See also, the FCC's order [127 pages in PDF] titled "Memorandum Opinion and Order and Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking", which is also known as the US Telecom Forbearance Long Order. The FCC adopted that order on May 10, 2013, and released it on May 17. It is FCC 13-69 in WC Docket No. 12-61, CC Docket Nos. 00-199 and 99-301, and numerous other dockets. And see, the FCC's July 23, 2013 Public Notice (DA 13-1617).

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding Mobile Relay Associates' (MRA) request for waiver of Sections 2.106 and 90.35 of the FCC's rules to to operate on frequency pairs 462/467.5375 MHz and 462/467.7375 MHz at multiple locations in the Los Angeles, Denver, Las Vegas, and Miami metropolitan areas. See, FCC's August 29, 2013 Public Notice (DA 13-1838 in WT Docket No. 13-212).

Deadline to submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding CenturyLink's August 12, 2013 application, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 214 and 47 C.F.R. § 63.71, to discontinue certain Integrated Service Digital Network-Primary Rate Interface (ISDN-PRI) domestic telecommunications services in the states of Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington and Wyoming. See, FCC's August 30, 2013 Public Notice (DA 13-1851 in WC Docket No. 13-211).

Deadline to submit nominations to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for membership on its Trademark Public Advisory Committee (TPAC). See, USPTO release, and notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 156, August 13, 2013, at Pages 49260-49262.

9:00 AM - 5:00 PM. The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission will hold one in a series of meetings to review and edit its 2013 annual report to the Congress. Open to the public. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 151, August 6, 2013, at Pages 47829-47830. Location: Room 231, Hall of the States, 444 North Capitol St., NW.

9:00 AM - 5:00 PM. Day one of a three day event hosted by the Department of Commerce's (DOC) National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) titled "Intersection of Cloud and Mobility Forum and Workshop". Open to the public. Registration required. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 171, September 4, 2013, at Page 54453. See also, story titled "NIST to Hold Workshop on Cloud Computing and Mobility" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,594, September 3, 2013. Location: NIST, Red Auditorium, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD.

10:00 AM - 3:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will host an event titled "Cybersecurity Next Generation Technology Forum". The focus of this event is "safeguarding children on the Internet". See, notice. Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room, TW-C305, 445 12th St., SW.

10:30 AM. The House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Communications and Technology (SCT) will hold a hearing titled "Changes and Opportunities in the 5GHz Spectrum Band". The witnesses will be __. See, notice. Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

TIME? The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will host an event titled "Workshop" regarding mobile device location surveillance capabilities and precision. See, FCC Public Notice (DA 13-1873 in PS Docket No. 07-114) and stories titled "FCC Seeks Comments on Mobile Device Location Surveillance Capabilities" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,598, September 10, 2013, and "California House Democrats Urge FCC to Amend Phone Location Detection Rules" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,600, September 12, 2013.

9:00 AM - 5:00 PM. The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission will hold one in a series of meetings to review and edit its 2013 annual report to the Congress. Open to the public. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 151, August 6, 2013, at Pages 47829-47830. Location: Room 231, Hall of the States, 444 North Capitol St., NW.

9:00 AM - 5:00 PM. Day two of a three day event hosted by the Department of Commerce's (DOC) National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) titled "Intersection of Cloud and Mobility Forum and Workshop". Open to the public. Registration required. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 171, September 4, 2013, at Page 54453. See also, story titled "NIST to Hold Workshop on Cloud Computing and Mobility" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,594, September 3, 2013. Location: NIST, Red Auditorium, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD.

12:00 NOON. Deadline to submit requests to make a two minute oral presentation at the teleconference of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) brief public meeting on cyber security on October 7. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 186, September 25, 2013, Page 59013.

12:00 NOON - 2:30 PM. The Federalist Society will host a panel discussion titled "Supreme Court Preview: What Is in Store for October Term 2013?". The speakers will be Megan Brown (Wiley Rein), Michael Carvin (Jones Day), Neal Katyal (Georgetown University Law Center), Nicholas Rosenkranz (Georgetown University Law Center), and Jan Crawford (CBS News). Prices vary. Lunch will be served. See, notice. Location: National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The DC Bar Association (DCBA) will host a panel discussion titled "Cutting Edge FOIA Issues, Privacy and Civil Liberties". The DCBA notice states that "Open government issues raised by National Security Agency surveillance programs also will be discussed." The speakers will be Melanie Ann Pustay (Department of Justice), Adina Rosenbaum (Public Citizen), Elizabeth Shapiro (DOJ), Thomas Susman, and Edwin Huddleson. The price to attend ranges from $5 to $20. No webcast. No CLE credits. For more information, call 202-626-3463. The DC Bar has a history of barring reporters from its events. Location: DC Bar Conference Center, 1101 K St., NW.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Media Bureau (MB) in response to its June 25, 2013 Public Notice (PN) [6 pages in PDF] regarding video description of video programming that is delivered via both television and the internet. This PN is DA 13-1438 in MB Docket No. 11-43. See also, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 129, July 5, 2013, at Pages 40421-40424.

Tech Law Journal publishes a free access web site and a subscription e-mail alert. The basic rate for a subscription to the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert is $250 per year for a single recipient. There are discounts for subscribers with multiple recipients.

Free one month trial subscriptions are available. Also, free subscriptions are available for 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 two months after writing.

For information about subscriptions, see subscription information page.

Tech Law Journal now accepts credit card payments. See, TLJ credit card payments page.

TLJ is published by David Carney
Contact: 202-364-8882.
carney at techlawjournal dot com
3034 Newark St. NW, Washington DC, 20008.

Privacy Policy
Notices & Disclaimers
Copyright 1998-2013 David Carney. All rights reserved.