AT&T Agrees to $60M Settlement With FTC Over Data Throttling
The suit, which began in 2015, alleged that the telecommunications company slowed data speeds despite the fact that customers had purchased unlimited mobile data plans.
November 05, 2019 at 06:20 PM
2 minute read
AT&T has agreed to pay $60 million to settle charges from the Federal Trade Commission that it used a network management tool to restrict the speeds of mobile data plans advertised as "unlimited."
The telecommunications giant will distribute the settlement funds to consumers who had their data speeds reduced after a certain threshold of usage, a practice known as throttling, despite purchasing an unlimited plan prior to 2015.
AT&T president David Christopher and William Ryan, the Dallas-based company's senior vice president and general counsel, signed the stipulated proposed order for permanent injunction and monetary judgment filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Tuesday.
AT&T's attorneys referred a request for comment to the company. In an emailed statement, an AT&T spokesperson said, "Even though it has been years since we applied this network management tool in the way described by the FTC, we believe this is in the best interests of consumers."
The order, signed by Evan Rose of the FTC's Western Region in San Francisco, also requires the company to now disclose any speed restrictions in ads for its unlimited plans.
U.S. District Judge Edward Chen, who has presided over the case for the last four years, has yet to approve the agreement.
The FTC brought the complaint against the conglomerate in 2015 with allegations that its throttling practices significantly slowed customer's GPS, video streaming and web browsing applications. The complaint also claimed that AT&T's threshold for throttling unlimited plans' data speeds was as low as 2 GB per billing cycle in dense markets such as the San Francisco Bay Area and New York City.
The company was represented in the litigation by Benjamin Softness, Michael Kellogg, Kenneth Fetterman and Mark Hansen of Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick in Washington, D.C.; Ryan Sandrock of Sidley Austin in San Francisco; Brett Rosenthal of Reese Marketos in Dallas; Jeffrey Mark Tillotson of Tillotson Law in Dallas; and Peter Marketos of Reese Marketos in Dallas.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readAn ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Will Khan Resign? FTC Chair Isn't Saying Whether She'll Stick Around After Giving Up Gavel
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250