WASHINGTON—The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has denied an emergency motion to stay the FCC’s decision to open the 6 GHz band for unlicensed Wi-Fi.

The FCC passed an order in April to open the 6 GHz band, which is primarily used by broadcasters, telecoms and utility companies. While those incumbents are not opposed to expanding Wi-Fi, their concern is primarily that there are not enough protections in place to protect from potential interference from new spectrum users.

The specific case that was heard by the D.C. Circuit Court had AT&T serving as the petitioner seeking the stay against the FCC.

However, though the court did not grant the emergency stay, it will still hear the underlying challenges of telecoms, public safety officials and utilities to the FCC order. The parties have been granted 30 days to submit a joint proposal for filing briefs in the case.

In response to the court’s decision, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai tweeted that the decision was “Great news for consumers, who stand to benefit from super-fast, #Wifi6/#Wifi6E services in the home and on the go.”

According to TVT’s sister publication Multichannel News, the FCC denied petitions made directly to them about staying the opening of the entire 6 GHz band in August. 

WASHINGTON— 

The NAB has filed an official petition against the FCC in the U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C., asking it to review, and ultimately vacate, the commission’s Report and Order regarding unlicensed use in the 6 GHz spectrum band.

Broadcasters and other wireless operators use the 6 GHz band for auxiliary operations, including sports, breaking news and special events.

The FCC’s order would open the entire 1,200 MHz of the band for unlicensed Wi-Fi operation, a move the FCC hopes will help advance 5G. The FCC has also issued an NPRM to increase the power levels permitted for low-power indoor operations from the current 5 dB/MHz to 8 dB/MHz.

In its petition to the court, NAB says the order “unlawfully fails to protect the myriad of existing licensed users in the band from potential interference arising from such unlicensed use. Television broadcasters in particular have both fixed and mobile operations in the 6 GHz band, which require different protective measures to be adequately insulated from harmful interference. The order neglects to include proper safeguards for either type of broadcast operations.”

NAB has filed comments to the FCC directly in response to these potential moves, asking the commission to hold off until the full breadth of potential interference can be gauged. On the opposing side, computer companies like Facebook, Apple, Google and Microsoft have been supporting the FCC’s push for expanded unlicensed use.

Now, labeling the order as an action that would have immediate adverse consequences for the organization and its members, NAB is seeking relief from the order on the following grounds:

• It’s arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion under 5 U.S.C. § 706; 
• It violates federal law, including the Administrative Procedure Act, the Communications Act of 1934, commission regulations and, as the NAB argues, the Constitution; and 
• It is otherwise contrary to law 

 “Accordingly, NAB respectfully requests that this Court hold unlawful, vacate, enjoin and set aside the Order and grant such additional relief as may be necessary and appropriate,” the NAB concluded.

The FCC declined to comment when contacted by TV Technology.

The official petition is available online.

WASHINGTON—All plans for the C-band auction will remain on schedule for now, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit denied a motion to stay the auction by a group of satellite operators.

The motion was officially filed under PSSI Global Services LLC, but was also supported by ABS Global Ltd., Empresa Argentina de Soluciones Satelitas S.A.,Hispamar Satélites S.A and Hispasat S.A. They argued that the FCC initiated a chain of events—starting with the election by space station operators to relocate from the C-band on an accelerated schedules—that would harm them by “benefitting competing space station operators that are eligible for relocation and accelerated relocation payments and depriving them of spectrum access rights without compensation.” In addition, they said the FCC did not have the authority to modify their spectrum rights, gave out to much money in accelerated payments and arbitrarily excluded them from getting those payments.

The court ruled that the “[a]pellants have not satisfied the stringent requirements for a stay pending appeal.” This means that the C-band auction will currently continue as planned until the court hears the challenge on its merits and gives a judgement at that time. The court has asked both parties to submit a briefing by June 29.

“Today’s ruling is great news for American consumers and U.S. leadership in 5G,” said FCC Chairman Ajit Pai. “I am very pleased that the D.C. Circuit rejected this attempt by small satellite operators with no U.S. operations in the C-band to delay our efforts to repurpose critical mid-band spectrum. The FCC will continue to defend our order on merits, and I look forward to our C-band auction beginning on Dec. 8.”

The FCC had denied a similar petition to delay the start of the auction by the same group of international satellite operators two weeks ago, according to TVT’s sister publication Multichannel News.

The C-band auction will see the transition of current C-band operators move from the top portion of the spectrum as the FCC frees up 280 MHz for 5G. More information is available on TVT’s C-band hub page.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has declined to overturn the FCC's restoration of the UHF discount on the grounds that the parties challenging it--Free Press, Prometheus Radio--did not have standing to bring the challenge.

That could be a big boost to broadcast M&A, though it might not be the big boost for the Sinclair-Tribune deal given the FCC's other problems with it.

The UHF discount means that only half of a UHF TV station's audience counts towards the 39% national ownership cap. The discount allowed Sinclair to bid for Tribune stations that otherwise would have pushed it to almost double that 39% cap.

“I’m pleased with the court’s decision to reject this challenge to the reinstatement of the UHF discount pending the completion of our comprehensive review of the national ownership cap," said FCC chair Ajit Pai.

[Read: Report: Pai Preparing July Vote On 39 Percent Cap/UHF Discount Review]

During oral argument last April, the judges clearly had concerns about not having statements from individual members of the associations establishing particular harms related to the Sinclair-Tribune deal, which the petitioners used as an example of the harms of the discount. The court wanted the petitioners to have identified at least one Free Press member or Prometheus member in a Sinclair market that would have been affected by the potential merger.

The three-judge panel of the court said the argument did not even warrant a published opinion, adding that it did not have to reach the merits of the decision because of that lack of standing.

Those merits were whether it was within the FCC's discretion to reinstate the UHF discount pending “a broader review of the [national ownership] cap” itself after the FCC, under previous chair Tom Wheeler, had concluded it had erred in eliminating the UHF discount before that review.

Since there is no published opinion, it is unclear whether the petitioners could have won on the merits, though two of the three judges appeared inclined to agree with them. Most observers of that oral argument had speculated that, if the standing issue did not derail the challenge, it had a good chance of succeeding and the discount repealed and remanded back to the FCC.

But in a two-page document dismissing the petition to overturn the FCC decision, the three-judge panel said: "Membership organizations may assert standing on behalf of their members, but in order to do so they must show that at least one member “would otherwise have standing to sue in [his or her] own right.”

The court said Prometheus and Free Press did not do that, and it did not accept those showings in a supplement filed after oral argument.

Now that the court has ruled, Pai is expected to proceed with an item that combines the discount with re-thinking the 39% national audience reach cap to which the discount is tied, perhaps by raising it to 50%, as some broadcasters have asked for, with a review of that move down the line in case it needs some more raising.

Free Press and Prometheus can appeal the three-judge decision to the full court.

Free Press attorney Andrew Schwartzman had no comment on next steps, saying he was still processing the decision and that it was too early to make that call.

"This should remove the cloud hanging over broadcasters, preventing them from further growth. The next, and most important, step is for the Commission to eliminate the national cap altogether," said Adonis Hoffman, former top FCC staffer and currently head of Business in the Public Interest. "Taken together, these actions will give broadcasters the regulatory foundation yo compete in a rapidly changing media market against the likes of FAANG [Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix and Google]."

Equity Research analyst Marci Ryvicker called it a "nice and unexpected positive for the broadcast space."