Home > News > Huawei fight back? Lawsuit to FCC latest restrictions next week

Huawei fight back? Lawsuit to FCC latest restrictions next week

According to a Wall Street Journal report, people familiar with the matter revealed that Huawei has decided to fight back the US Federal Communications Commission's decision last week to ban U.S. telecommunications operators from using the General Service Fund to purchase services and equipment from Huawei and ZTE.

Huawei is preparing to sue on the decision, which is part of Huawei's challenge to the United States to restrict its business.

People familiar with the matter said that Huawei is expected to file a lawsuit with the New Orleans Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal next week and will officially announce the news at a press conference held in Shenzhen headquarters.

It is understood that the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted a decision banning operators from using federal subsidy funds to purchase Huawei and ZTE equipment on the 22nd. In addition, the committee voted to recommend that US carriers be required to remove and replace both devices from their existing networks.

It is reported that Huawei and ZTE will have 30 days to challenge the FCC's "national security risk" determination. If the two companies raise objections, the ban may take effect in 120 days.

In the early morning of the 23rd, Huawei issued a statement on this resolution, expressing its opposition and stressing that the FCC's decision is based on one-sided information and misinterpretation of Chinese law. "Without evidence, Huawei is deemed to constitute a national security threat, not only a violation The principle of due process of legislation is also suspected of breaking the law. "

It is understood that as early as March, Huawei sued the U.S. government in a federal court in Texas, alleging that Section 889 of the U.S. National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2019 violated the U.S. Constitution, asking the court to determine this sales restriction against Huawei The clause was unconstitutional, and an order was made to permanently prohibit the implementation of the restriction.