Cablevision filed suit in federal court against Verizon Tuesday, seeking a declaratory judgment to allow it to continue running an ad that "exposes Verizon's false and misleading marketing claims" about its FiOS service. "Verizon has not been truthful to the public for nearly 10 years about FiOS," said a Cablevision news release. "Verizon FiOS is not all fiber and, in fact, uses regular coaxial cable inside the home. Cablevision ran an advertisement revealing that FiOS is not all fiber, and now Verizon is demanding that Cablevision stop running its ad. Consumers deserve to make informed decisions based on facts, and Cablevision is asking the court to intervene to stop Verizon from attempting to continue to mislead the public.” Cablevision said that in some cases, Verizon had used coaxial cable outside the home as well. Cablevision's complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York said that Verizon had "sent a cease and desist letter to Cablevision asserting that Cablevision’s television commercial 'must be immediately stopped' and asserted that commercial was false advertising "under Section 1125(a) of the Lanham Act and other federal and state laws." Verizon then filed a challenge to Cablevision’s advertisement with the National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus, but Cablevision had decided voluntarily not to submit to the NAD review, the complaint said. Verizon responded that "once again Cablevision demonstrates an unhealthy appetite for confusing consumers. Cablevision cannot compete with Verizon FiOS, or even come close to providing the Internet speeds and performance available from Verizon’s 100 percent fiber-optic network. Since their network can’t compete against FiOS, they resort to legal stunts, which we will challenge vigorously."

The FCC Wireline Bureau is seeking comment on Granite Telecommunications' request for FCC clarification of Bell Operating Company (BOC) Section 271 duties to combine unbundled network elements at wholesale discounts and commingle them with other services. Comments/petitions are due June 15 and replies/oppositions are due June 30, said a bureau public notice in docket 15-114. In a May 4 petition for a declaratory ruling, Granite, a CLEC with business customers, asked the FCC to remove uncertainty about BOC duties "(1) not to separate unbundled network elements ('UNEs') provisioned pursuant to Section 271(c)(2)(B)(iv)-(vi) of the [Communications] Act; (2) to combine such UNEs; and (3) to commingle such UNEs with other wholesale services." Granite said a court-driven FCC rollback in ILEC unbundling duties under Section 251, the absence of FCC rules on BOC Section 271 UNE duties, and a recent USTelecom filing -- asserting the BOCs don't have to combine Section 271 UNEs -- "have created uncertainty as to the BOCs' obligations regarding the separation, combination, and commingling of Section 271 UNEs." Citing a Section 202(a) prohibition against unreasonable discrimination and a Section 201(b) prohibition against unjust and unreasonable practices, Granite asked the FCC (1) to prevent BOCs from separating already-combined UNEs unless requested by a CLEC or unless the BOCs have a reasonable basis for doing so; (2) to require BOCs to combine Section 271 UNEs at the request of CLECs unless the BOCs have a reasonable basis for refusing to do so; and (3) to require BOCs to commingle, or allow CLECs to commingle, Section 271 UNEs with wholesale services obtained from ILECs unless the BOCs have a reasonable basis for refusing to do so. Granite said the BOC Section 271 obligations to provide competitors with unbundled access to local loops, transport, and switching are ongoing and independent of ILEC Section 251 unbundling duties. "[I]n the absence of Section 251 unbundling obligations for local switching and shared transport, the Section 271 competitive checklist provides the only regulatory compulsion for BOCs to provide these network elements on an unbundled basis today," Granite said.

The FCC Wireline Bureau is seeking comment on Clearwire's application to discontinue digital voice VoIP services in Chico and Redding, California, and Reno/Carson City, Nevada. Comments are due June 1, and the application will be granted automatically June 16 absent FCC action halting it, said a bureau public notice on docket 15-117 in Monday's Daily Digest. Clearwire indicated its parent Sprint, as part of its 4G LTE upgrade, is shutting down the towers that support the Clearwire broadband service over which it provides the affected VoIP offering, which has only about 95 customers, the notice said. It said Clearwire reported that all the customers were notified and alternative voice services are available.

A U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit panel on Friday dismissed Global Crossing's legal challenge to a 2012 FCC order under which the company was to pay an additional $4.34 million into the USF contribution system. The panel issued a dismissal judgment rather than an opinion because it found it had no jurisdiction over Global Crossing's petition for review. The panel said it could review only final FCC orders, and this one was an interlocutory order remanding an audit to the fund's administrator. The administrator lowered Global Crossing's payment obligation from an original $5.6 million under the audit to $4.34 million and "could have imposed zero contribution liability on Global Crossing," the panel said. "Such an outcome would clearly obviate the need for judicial review. Indeed in that event petitioner would lack standing to challenge the order," the panel found.

Verizon told FCC officials that six wire-center migrations to all-fiber facilities went "smoothly, with very few customer complaints," the company said in an ex parte filing posted Thursday in docket 13-5 on Technology Transitions. Customers received the same or similar services, including plain old telephone service (POTS), on comparable prices and terms over "more reliable" fiber lines than copper, Verizon said, noting the migrations weren't from legacy TDM systems to IP packet switching. Verizon said transition notifications to wholesale customers "worked well" and showed there's no need for new requirements. Migrating voice-grade digital signal 0 customers to like services over fiber is "technically possible" but "very expensive," Verizon said; the company has filed a Section 214 application to grandfather and discontinue offering those services to new customers in the six wire centers. Verizon said its notifications to retail customers were also effective, though in some cases it found sending multiple communications to customers could be confusing. Verizon noted concerns about some FCC NPRM proposals for specific types of notifications, and it urged the agency to preserve flexibility for carriers in their customer communications. Verizon said it provided customers with backup batteries that could power voice systems for up to 20 hours if power goes out, well above the NPRM's eight-hour-minimum proposal, but it opposed any mandatory backup configuration standard, given various industry configurations. Finally, Verizon touted broader benefits from the migration in the six wire centers: the reduction in power consumption by 1 million kilowatt hours (enough to power 100 homes for a year), the use of D-cell batteries that will reduce lead in landfills, and the retirement and removal of copper, reducing opportunities for theft. (Verizon said it has had 1,700 incidents of copper theft since 2009.) The six wire centers were in Ocean View, Virginia; Belle Harbor, New York; Hummelstown, Pennsylvania; Farmingdale, New Jersey; Lynnfield, Massachusetts; and Orchard Park, New York, Verizon told us by email on Friday.

Comments on FCC efforts to reduce telco paperwork burdens for depreciation rate changes are due July 13, said the agency in a notice in Thursday's Federal Register. Communications common carriers with annual operating revenue of at least $150.2 million and classified as "dominant" must file certain information before making any depreciation rate changes for their operating plant. The FCC requires the carriers to file four summary exhibits including underlying data and provide the "depreciation factors (i.e., life, salvage, curve shape, depreciation reserve) required to verify the calculation of the carrier's depreciation expenses and rates" -- a process that takes 24 respondents a total of 6,000 hours, 250 hours each on average, and $919,560 to comply, the notice said. The FCC has discretion on specific record keeping and, citing its Paperwork Reduction Act mandate, invited the public and other federal agencies to comment on the necessity of the information collection, its practical utility and clarity, and ways to enhance the quality of the information and minimize the burdens on respondents, including small businesses.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit should uphold a 2014 FCC order rejecting a Saturn Telecommunications Services complaint against AT&T (then BellSouth) over a 2006 interconnection agreement, the agency said in a brief Tuesday asking the court to deny Saturn's petition for review. The FCC said Saturn, a competitive LEC, was bound by the terms of a settlement to not refile allegations against AT&T related to their interconnection proceeding in Florida. The FCC disputed Saturn's contention that its complaint to the commission was limited to post-settlement conduct, and regardless, the agency said, Saturn's claim accrued before the settlement. The FCC also said the court had no jurisdiction to review a Saturn breach-of-contract claim -- that AT&T had failed to convert 2,500 of the CLEC's customers to a new wholesale platform -- because Saturn had not exhausted its administrative remedies.

The FCC's request to refresh the record on a telecom rate formula for pole-attachments was published in the Federal Register Thursday, triggering a due date of June 4 for initial comments and June 15 for replies. A Wireline Bureau notice sought new input on a 2011 petition by Comptel, NCTA and tw telecom (now part of Level 3) to revise the telecom rate formula to better allocate costs among carriers attaching lines to poles, which are generally owned by power companies (see 1505060055). The FCC's recent order reclassifying broadband under Communications Act Title II gives power companies more justification to charge cable broadband providers for attachments under the telecom formula, which traditionally yielded higher rates than a cable formula and which doesn't adjust cost allocation based on the number of attaching carriers.

An FCC advisory group urged the agency to take action to educate consumers about the ongoing IP technology transitions, after that Intergovernmental Advisory Committee found consumers often lacked awareness of the changes or were being told they would lose their phone service. In an filing posted Tuesday in docket 13-5, the committee said the FCC should be "proactive" in educational efforts and require providers "to inform consumers of their options well before" actual transitions occur. The group is concerned that providers might use fiber upgrades to "upsell" consumers if bundled packages of services are offered as the only replacements for phone service. Residents may find that "they are suddenly getting and paying for services they do not need, do not want and certainly do not want to pay for," the group said, noting the possibility consumers could be locked into long-term contracts. The group said it worries the transitions could harm competitive LECs and their customers by cutting off their access to DSL/copper-based networks, and undermine the reliability of public-safety service such as 911 calling. It submitted various recommendations that the FCC step up consumer education and outreach efforts akin to those used during the DTV transition. Although Congress hadn't appropriated funds like it did for DTV, the group said the FCC should require providers to notify residential and business customers of the transitions through various means, including informing government agencies of their plans, posting information on websites, running public service announcements, and providing materials and templates for agencies to use in dealing with consumers.

Smithwick and Belendiuk asked the FCC to revisit aspects of its net neutrality order. In a petition for reconsideration in docket 14-28, the law firm said FCC net neutrality rules were "too narrow, and that its forbearance from key provisions of Title II (broadband reclassification) goes too far." The firm said the order banned paid prioritization but didn't address unpaid prioritization of Internet traffic. "The FCC leaves far too much to be decided on an individual case basis," the firm said, urging the FCC to ban all forms of preferential treatment, including so-called 'sponsored data" plans, such as T-Mobile's "Music Freedom." The agency should also require broadband providers to offer stand-alone, last-mile transmission to competitors, the firm said.