Dahua Sues USA, FCC
Dahua is suing the FCC and the United States Government, asking a federal court to overturn the FCC's national security ban on future equipment authorizations.
Dahua joins Hikvision who sued the FCC earlier this month after the FCC order became law.
Precedents for such cases exist, for example, Huawei lost lawsuits over the NDAA and a different FCC ban.
In this report, IPVM examines Dahua's legal arguments, including Dahua's statement to IPVM about the case, the FCC's response so far, and the outlook for Dahua vs the FCC.
********
** ******** **, ****, ***** ***** a ******** *** ****** **** *** US ***** ** ******* *** *** Ninth *******:***** ********** *** ***. *. ******* Communications ********** *** ****** ****** ** America. (** ***** **** *** *****'* filing ****** ********* **** **** ********* the ****** ***** ******** **.)
***** ******* ***,***** **** **** ** ******** ** FCC ****** ** ******** ** ******* appellate *********** **** *** ******* ******** *****.
***** ***** ** *********** *** ************** ***** *** ***** **** *** *** exceeded *** ************, *** *** ****** proper ***** **********, *** **** *** order ** ****************:
***** ********* **** ***** ** *** aside *** ***** ******** ** * U.S.C. § ***(*) ******* ** ** arbitrary, **********, ** ***** ** **********, or ********* *** ** ********** **** law; ******** ** ************** *****, *****, privilege, ** ********; ** ****** ** statutory ************, *********, ** ***********, ** short ** ********* *****; *** ******* observance ** ********* ******** ** ***.
***** ****** ******* *** ** ********* ** ** Hikvision's ****, ****** *** ***. ********* ************ alleged *** *** ****** ** "*** supported ** *********** ********," ***** ***** did ***.
***** ****-**** ********** *** ********* ** *****'* ****, Dahua *** ****** *** **** ****** in ******* *** ********. *** *** also ******* ***** **** *********** *** ******** *****. ***** ** *** ** **** an ******** ***** ********** *** **** in ***.
Ninth ******* **. ** ***** ******** ********
*****'* ****** ** **** *** **** in *** ***** ******* ***** ** Appeals—which ****** *** ** **** *****—******* from *********, ***** ***** ** ** Circuit *****. (****** ***** ** ******** in **** *****; ***** *** ********* both **** ******* ** **********, ***** the *** ** ** **.)
***** ***** *** *** ******* *** selection ** *****, **** ***** ** a ********* ******** ******* ** **** two ******** ****** ****** *** *** ruling ******* ** **** ***. ***** Dahua's **** ** ****** ********* ** Hikvision's, *** ** ******* ***** *** have ************ **** **** * ****** case. ***** ****** **** ** ****** in *** ***** *******, ******* ***** filed ** ********* ****** ****** ** consolidated.
** ** ****, *** *** *** still ****** *** *** ***** ******* to ******** *****'* **** ** *** DC *******, ****** ************* ********, *** it ** *** ******* **** *** Ninth ******* **** *****.
FCC ********
****** *** ***** * *************** "************* ********** ** ************ ********* for ******" ***** ***** ** ********** handling ******* *****, **** ** ***** and *********'*.
*** *** ************ ***** **** ***** and *********'* *****, *.*. *****:
*******
********* ** *** ***** *******'********* *** *** ****, ***** ** *** ** **** a "********** ******* *****" ** *** 5, **** ********** *** ** ******** the *** ****** ****** ** **********. The *** **** **** **** *** response ** **** *, ****. ** further ***** *** ********* ** **** time. ** ******** *****, ***** *** also ** * ****** ** ****** the ***** ** ** ******* *****.
* ******* ********* ***** *** **** months ** ***** ** ***** * decision. *******, ***** ** ** ****** on*** ***'* ***, ***** **** ****** on ******** *, ********* *** ****** *** ***** ***** in *****'* *****.
***** ******* ********** **** ****** **** lost, **** ********* ******** ******** **** the ***, *****'* **** **** ** challenging ** ***.
********** ** *** *******, ***** ******** in *** ***** ****, ** ** can **** *** ******* *** ******** that ** ** ***** *** **********.
Comment **** *****
***** **** **** *** ********* *********:
***** ********** *** *** ********** *** United ****** ***** ** ******* *** the ***** ******* **set ***** *** *** ***** regarding future equipment authorizations for ******* **** *********, ********* *****, as the Commission exceeded the specific and limited authority conferred on it by the Secure Equipment Act. We look forward to presenting our arguments to the Court in the coming months.
*** **** ** ******** *** ***** is **** *** **** ** *** overall ******** ** ******* *** **** possible ******* *** *** ************, ******* and ***** ********. ** ***also ******** **** *** ***, which provided a path forward for Dahua to receive ****** ********* **************, provided we meet certain conditions. [empahsis added]
**** ***** **** ** ******** **** for ******* **** ********* ********* ** notable.
*******, ** ***** ********* ** *** statement, ***** ** **** ********* *** the *********** ** ****** **** **** and **** ****** ******** * "********** ********" **** ** allow ***** ********* ** ******* ****** authorizations.