BEFORE THE UNITED STATATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Similar documents
BEFORE THE UNITED STATATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. v. ) NOTICE OF ERRATA TO PETITION FOR REVIEW

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ReCEIVED FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCU CLERK

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APP: AJllS--~---- PETITION FOR REVIEW. and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 15( a), the Mozilla Corporation

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOTION OF AMERICAN CABLE ASSOCIATION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. No (and consolidated case)

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

18 105G. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT Oi, FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMB &!IPANIC MEDIA COALITION, Petitioner CASE NO. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

STATE MEMBERS OF THE FEDERAL-STATE JOINT BOARD ON UNIVERSAL SERVICE

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS OF COMPTEL

CLERK RECEIVED. JTW OR UiSThICT ØF OL tikbta. FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRC1 lit ETSY, INC., Petitioner

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

REPLY COMMENTS OF THE COMPUTER & COMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION (CCIA)

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) OPPOSITION TO MOTION REGARDING INFORMAL COMPLAINTS

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No (and consolidated cases) IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

[ORAL ARGUMENT NOT SCHEDULED] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT : : : : MOTION TO GOVERN

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMl\USSION Washington D.C

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 2, No (and consolidated cases) UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

[NOT SCHEDULED FOR ORAL ARGUMENT] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

Before The Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 9, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT AT&T INC. S OPPOSITION TO FCC S MOTION TO HOLD CASE IN ABEYANCE

ORAL ARGUMENT HELD APRIL 13, 2012 No and consolidated cases (COMPLEX)

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT MOTION TO INTERVENE IN PETITION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW

FCC BROADBAND JURISDICTION: THE PSTN TRANSITION IN AN ERA OF CONGRESSIONAL PARALYSIS. Russell Lukas April 4, 2013

Review of Foreign Ownership Policies for Broadcast, Common Carrier and Aeronautical

Supreme Court of the United States

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. VILLAGE OF OLD MILL CREEK, ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellants, No

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 07/19/2011 Page 1 of 8 [NOT SCHEDULED FOR ORAL ARGUMENT] No

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 09/09/2011 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse 40 Foley Square, New York, NY Telephone:

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO TRANSFER AND HOLD CASES IN ABEYANCE

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CC No

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED: OCTOBER 17, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

VERIZON NEW HAMPSHIRE /BULLSEYE TELECOM, INC.

B t NA L. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEAl. wr FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCU] f FOR DITRIT Q QCLJMHA ILtUIt

VERIZON NEW HAMPSHIRE/BIDDEFORD INTERNET CORPORATION

Case 1:09-cv JCC-IDD Document 26 Filed 03/08/10 Page 1 of 23 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT NO D VICTOR DIMAIO, Plaintiff-Appellant, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

MAJOR COURT DECISIONS, 2006

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 19, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554

Follow this and additional works at:

Role of Small Cell Infrastructure Legal/Regulatory Background

PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS

Case , Document 1-1, 04/21/2017, , Page1 of 2

3RD CIRCUIT LOCAL APPELLATE RULES Proposed amendments Page 1

Telecom Update 2016 Outlook 2017

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. v. Case Number: 3:16-cr-93-J-32-JRK

ORAL ARGUMENT HELD DECEMBER 10, 2013 DECIDED APRIL 15, 2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

[ORAL ARGUMENT HELD ON APRIL 15, 2016] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. Defendants-Appellees.

Case 2:18-cv JAM-DB Document 15 Filed 10/26/18 Page 1 of 8

ORU l;~]i ^i^totestodhhfw^

Case 2:18-cv JAM-DB Document 34 Filed 10/26/18 Page 1 of 8

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 08/28/2018 Page 1 of 15 BEFORE THE UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

Juan Carlos Flores-Zavala v. Atty Gen USA

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT MOTION OF TELMATE, LLC FOR PARTIAL RECONSIDERATION

CLOSED CIVIL CASE. Case 1:09-cv DLG Document 62 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/14/2010 Page 1 of 10

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) REPORT AND ORDER. Adopted: September 5, 2017 Released: September 8, 2017

Plaintiffs-Appellants, Docket Nos (L), 445(Con) DECLARATION OF SARAH S. NORMAND. SARAH S. NORMAND, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1746, declares as

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:11-cv RHS-WDS Document 5 Filed 11/10/11 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

In the Supreme Court of the United States

[ORAL ARGUMENT HELD APRIL 12, 2016] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Transcription:

USCA Case #15-1099 Document #1548678 Filed: 04/22/2015 Page 1 of 5 BEFORE THE UNITED STATATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT UNITED STATES TELECOM ASSOCIATION v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, et al. Case No. 15-1063 MOTION TO INTERVENE OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE UTILITY CONSUMER ADVOCATES IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT The National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates ( NASUCA moves to intervene in this appeal, which implicates the interests of consumers of telecommunications and related services throughout the United States. The appeal challenges the Federal Communications Commission ( FCC Reclassification Order, 1 which correctly classified broadband Internet access service 2 as a telecommunications service under 47 U.S.C. 153(53. 3 This motion is made pursuant to FRAP 15(d and Circuit Rule 15(d. 1 Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet, FCC GN Docket No. 14-28, Report and Order on Remand, Declaratory Ruling, and Order, FCC No. 15-24 (rel. Mar 12, 2015 ( Reclassification Order. Alamo Communications has also filed an appeal from the Reclassification Order, in the Fifth Circuit; on March 30, 2015. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation directed that the D.C. Circuit would hear the appeal. 2 The FCC refers to this service as BIAS. 3 The United States Telecom Association ( USTelecom filed its protective Petition for Review in Case No. 15-1063 within ten days of the release of the order on appeal. USTelecom filed a supplemental petition after the order had been published in the Federal Register,on April 13, 2015. 1

USCA Case #15-1099 Document #1548678 Filed: 04/22/2015 Page 2 of 5 Statement of Interest. NASUCA is a voluntary association of 44 consumer advocate offices in 41 states and the District of Columbia, incorporated in Florida as a non-profit corporation. NASUCA s members are designated by laws of their respective jurisdictions to represent the interests of utility consumers before state and federal regulators and in the courts. Members operate independently from state utility commissions as advocates for utility ratepayers. Some NASUCA member offices are separately established advocate organizations while others are divisions of larger state agencies (e.g., the state Attorney General s office. NASUCA s associate and affiliate members also serve utility consumers but are not created by state law or do not have statewide authority. Some NASUCA member offices advocate in states whose respective state commissions do not have jurisdiction over certain telecommunications issues. On behalf of consumers, NASUCA filed numerous comments and, pursuant to FCC rules, made ex parte communications, in the proceedings leading to the Reclassification Order. 4 NASUCA s standing on appeal of FCC orders affecting consumers has been recognized in this circuit and elsewhere. This Circuit heard NASUCA s appeal of FCC unbundling rules in Covad v. FCC, 450 F.3d 528 (D.C. Cir., 2006. 4 NASUCA Comments (July 15, 2014; NASUCA Reply Comments (September 15, 2014; NASUCA ex parte communication (September 22, 2014; NASUCA ex parte (February 20, 2015. 2

USCA Case #15-1099 Document #1548678 Filed: 04/22/2015 Page 3 of 5 NASUCA was one of thirty petitioners In re FCC 11-161, 753 F.3d 1015 (10 th Cir., 2014, filed its own brief and joined in the main briefs, and presented oral argument. The standing recognized in those cases meets any reasonable test for intervention in this appeal. NASUCA supports the key finding of the Reclassification Order, which is the reclassification of broadband Internet access service ( BIAS as a Title II service. This proper classification protects consumers from the harms that have been and likely would be inflicted by dominant network owners. Therefore, NASUCA moves this Court to grant its intervention in this appeal. Respectfully submitted, CHARLES A. ACQUARD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NASUCA 8380 Colesville Road, Suite 101 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Phone (301 589-6313 Fax (301 589-6380 /s/ David C. Bergmann David C. Bergmann Counsel for NASUCA 3293 Noreen Drive Columbus OH 43221 (614 771-5979 David.c.bergmann@gmail.com 3

USCA Case #15-1099 Document #1548678 Filed: 04/22/2015 Page 4 of 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I caused this Motion of the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates to Intervene in Support of Respondent to be served by filing with the CM/ECF system of the United States Court of Appeal for the D.C. Circuit. /s/ David C. Bergmann David C. Bergmann Counsel for NASUCA 3293 Noreen Drive Columbus OH 43221 (614 771-5979 David.c.bergmann@gmail.com 4

USCA Case #15-1099 Document #1548678 Filed: 04/22/2015 Page 5 of 5 RULE 261 STATEMENT The National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates (NASUCA is a voluntary association of advocate offices in more than forty states and the District of Columbia, incorporated in Florida as a non-profit corporation. NASUCA s members are designated by the laws of their respective jurisdictions to represent the interests of utility consumers before state and federal regulators and in the courts. Members operate independently from state utility commissions as advocates primarily for residential ratepayers. Some NASUCA member offices are separately established advocate organizations while others are divisions of larger state agencies (e.g., the state Attorney General s office. NASUCA s associate and affiliate members also serve utility consumers but are not created by state law or do not have statewide authority. NASUCA has no parent company, subsidiary, or affiliate that has issued securities to the public. No publicly traded company owns any equity interest in NASUCA. 5