District Court Won't Certify Crown Castle Suit for Appeal
A federal district court refused to certify a Crown Castle small-cells suit against a New York town for interlocutory appeal to the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. At the U.S. District Court in Central Islip, New York, Crown Castle…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
claimed Hempstead violated Communications Act Section 332 when it delayed and effectively denied a request to install wireless facilities in the right of way (see 1811200030). After the court December denied (in Pacer) cross-motions for summary judgment, Crown Castle and Hempstead sought appeal to the 2nd Circuit. The parties failed to satisfy that the case meets “exceptional circumstances,” Magistrate Judge Gary Brown wrote (in Pacer) Tuesday. Brown ordered the parties to submit a joint status report and discovery schedule within 14 days. Hempstead “may be correct that there is substantial grounds for a difference of opinion” on whether 4G LTE is an information or telecom service, but failed to establish that an appeal “will materially advance the litigation,” the judge said. “Resolution of this question will not avoid protracted litigation.”