⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

We hear a dispute that began with the advertised monthly price of home internet service. In their proposed class-action complaint against the company operating as Metronet, customers say they signed up after seeing an advertised price, then discovered an additional mandatory monthly charge. The complaint calls it the Technology Services Fee, also known as Tech Assure. The customers allege that the charge was separate from the advertised base price and applied even if they never requested a technician's visit or equipment repair. Their complaint explains why that mattered: someone comparing internet providers by their advertised prices would not be comparing the total amount they would actually have to pay. These are allegations of misleading pricing, not findings that the company committed fraud. Murray and another customer brought the lawsuit seeking relief for themselves and a proposed class of other subscribers. The customers' central objection is not simply that an extra fee exists, but that the advertised price allegedly failed to reveal a charge they could not avoid. As you hear the argument, separate that allegation from the question of what the advertisements and accompanying disclosures actually told a prospective customer. Listen for when and where the customer encountered the price information, and whether a disclosure about additional fees answers a complaint that the headline price itself was misleading. And keep the question of whether the allegations are sufficient to proceed separate from the ultimate question of whether those allegations can be proved.

Jyoti Gautam Murray v. Metro Fibernet, LLC (No. 25-2687) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, argued November 3, 2026.