Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Opinion Preview

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

  • Case Opinion

FTC v. AT&T Mobility LLC

FTC v. AT&T Mobility LLC

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

September 19, 2017, Argued and Submitted En Banc, San Francisco, California; February 26, 2018, Filed

No. 15-16585

Opinion

 [*850]  McKEOWN, Circuit Judge:

Although this case began as an effort by the Federal Trade Commission [**5]  ("FTC") to address AT&T Mobility's "data throttling"—a practice by which the company reduced customers' broadband data speed without regard to actual network congestion—the central issue is one of agency jurisdiction and statutory construction.

Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act ("FTC Act"), which gives the agency enforcement authority over "unfair or deceptive acts or practices," exempts, among others, "common carriers subject to the Acts to regulate commerce." 15 U.S.C. § 45(a)(1), (2). The question is whether the common-carrier exemption is activity-based, meaning that a common carrier is exempt from FTC jurisdiction only with respect to its common-carrier activities, or status-based, such that an entity engaged in common-carrier activities is entirely exempt from FTC jurisdiction.

We affirm the district court's denial of AT&T's motion to dismiss. Looking to the FTC Act's text, the meaning of "common carrier" according to the courts around the time the statute was passed in 1914, decades of judicial interpretation, the expertise of the FTC and Federal Communications Commission ("FCC"), and legislative history, we conclude that the exemption is activity-based. The phrase "common carriers subject to the [**6]  Acts to regulate commerce" thus provides immunity from FTC regulation only to the extent that a common carrier is engaging in common-carrier services.

This statutory interpretation also accords with common sense. The FTC is the  [*851]  leading federal consumer protection agency and, for many decades, has been the chief federal agency on privacy policy and enforcement. Permitting the FTC to oversee unfair and deceptive non-common-carriage practices of telecommunications companies has practical ramifications. New technologies have spawned new regulatory challenges. A phone company is no longer just a phone company. The transformation of information services and the ubiquity of digital technology mean that telecommunications operators have expanded into website operation, video distribution, news and entertainment production, interactive entertainment services and devices, home security and more. Reaffirming FTC jurisdiction over activities that fall outside of common-carrier services avoids regulatory gaps and provides consistency and predictability in regulatory enforcement.

Background and Procedural History3

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

883 F.3d 848 *; 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 4624 **; 2018-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) P80,291; 2018 WL 1045406

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. AT&T MOBILITY LLC, a limited liability company, Defendant-Appellant.

Prior History:  [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. D.C. No.3:14-cv-04785-EMC. Edward M. Chen, District Judge, Presiding.

FTC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 87 F. Supp. 3d 1087, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43272 (N.D. Cal., Mar. 31, 2015)

Disposition: AFFIRMED.

CORE TERMS

common carrier, exemption, FTC Act, entity, common-carrier, regulation, carrier, customers, regulate commerce, activity-based, packers, mobile, Reclassification, status-based, stockyards, practices, unfair, telecommunications, quotation, cases, marks, non-common-carriage, common-carriage, interstate, unlimited, Commerce, engaging, banks, motion to dismiss, district court

Antitrust & Trade Law, Federal Trade Commission Act, Scope, Civil Procedure, Appeals, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Defenses, Demurrers & Objections, Motions to Dismiss, Failure to State Claim, Governments, Legislation, Interpretation, Business & Corporate Compliance, Communications Law, Federal Acts, Federal Communications Act, Communications Law, Regulators, US Federal Communications Commission, Authorities & Powers, Telecommunications Act, Coverage & Definitions, Transportation Law, Carrier Duties & Liabilities, Definitions, Administrative Law, Judicial Review, Deference to Agency Statutory Interpretation, US Federal Communications Commission, US Federal Trade Commission, Effect & Operation, Retrospective Operation, Preliminary Considerations, Justiciability, Mootness