Comcast Presses for TRO to Bar Cessation of MaxLinear’s Broadband Gateway Support
The war of words continued Wednesday between Comcast and MaxLinear over MaxLinear’s decision to terminate the parties’ contracts to support millions of broadband gateways used to provide internet service to Comcast customers (see 2305300045).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
MaxLinear wrote the U.S. District Court for Southern New York in Manhattan, saying Comcast’s request for an emergency temporary restraining order to block the cessation of MaxLinear’s services is “unnecessary” because MaxLinear committed to support the gateways through mid-August (see 2306010026). Comcast responded with a letter of its own the same day (docket 1:23-cv-04436) to “correct” what it called MaxLinear’s “misstatements.”
MaxLinear’s letter itself “further demonstrates” why Comcast needs the emergency TRO “under the circumstances,” said Comcast. MaxLinear “conspicuously” doesn’t contest that it breached its “relevant agreements” with Comcast when it purported to terminate both contracts “without the required notice and in violation of the applicable termination provisions,” it said.
MaxLinear bases its opposition to the TRO on its purported commitment to provide Comcast for 90 days the same contractual services it provided before its May 18 termination notice, but MaxLinear “never made such a commitment” before the letter, said Comcast. Even if that commitment were valid, it falls “far short of MaxLinear’s obligations” under the contracts with Comcast, “and therefore fails to eliminate the need for immediate emergency relief,” it said.
MaxLinear also “repeatedly changed its position” on the services it will provide Comcast following its “improper” termination notice, said Comcast. The notice itself “says nothing about MaxLinear continuing to perform any services,” it said. When Comcast asked MaxLinear by letter May 24 to confirm it will continue to perform the services under the contracts, MaxLinear “never responded,” it said.
When a Comcast executive spoke with MaxLinear’s CEO May 25, the CEO “referenced only undefined ‘support’ but did not commit” to honor the terms of the existing contracts, said Comcast. Only after Comcast filed suit the next day did MaxLinear state, through its outside counsel, it would provide “commercially reasonable services” to Comcast for 90 days after termination, it said.
MaxLinear’s letter further makes clear that emergency relief is needed because its new commitment to provide services extends only for 90 days until mid-August, said Comcast. It’s entitled to extended termination “notice periods” under the contracts, it said. “Anything short” would cause Comcast “irreparable harm” because it wouldn’t have “the requisite time to determine an alternative plan to support its broadband gateways,” it said.
Despite MaxLinear’s assertions to the contrary, Comcast “has moved as quickly as possible to ensure MaxLinear complies with its full set of obligations” under the contracts, said Comcast. It responded to MaxLinear’s attempted termination notice the day after its procurement team received it, it said. It then filed the instant action the day after the deadline by which Comcast “requested a response from MaxLinear that never came,” it said.
Comcast filed its request for injunctive relief the same day the case was assigned and a summons issued, said Comcast. “It has taken these steps in order to prevent the significant irreparable harm MaxLinear’s breach will cause,” it said. Nothing in MaxLinear’s letter “cures its breach, eliminates the harm that will result from it, or obviates the need for immediate injunctive relief,” it said.