PETITION FOR REVIEW. Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 402(a), 28 U.S.C. 2342(1) and 2344, and Federal

Similar documents
ReCEIVED FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCU CLERK

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

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

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

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

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

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 10/23/2015 Page 1 of Constitution Avenue,

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

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 10/23/2015. DISTRICT OF COWMBAaijh 1

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

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

NITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS RECEIVEHE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT PETITION FOR REVIEW

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No (1:15-cv GBL-MSN)

ORU l;~]i ^i^totestodhhfw^

Case 3:07-cv SI Document 25 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 1 of 7

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

Case 1:99-cv PLF Document 6223 Filed 10/02/17 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 3:07-cv SI Document Filed 11/26/2007 Page 1 of 7

In the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH 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

\{."--, Under Section 307 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7607(b), Section 706 of

Case 4:12-cv Document 209 Filed in TXSD on 07/02/14 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

PETITION FOR REVIEW. Pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Circuit

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT IN RE TELES AG,

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 15, 2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

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

Case 2:17-cv WB Document 85 Filed 12/10/18 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

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

Case 4:16-cv ALM Document 10 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 779

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 07/25/18 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:13-cv Document 2 Filed 11/19/13 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

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

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

Case 1:16-cv JDB Document 56 Filed 01/16/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Introduction. 1. In an effort to give native Americans greater control over their own affairs,

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 10/17/18 Page 1 of 10

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 05/03/17 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

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

Case 1:12-cv Document 1 Filed 06/11/12 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. Plaintiff, Civil No.

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 02/26/18 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:17-cv CKK Document 21 Filed 07/07/17 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

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

Case 1:14-cv N/A Document 6 Filed 08/26/14 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMPLAINT

Case hdh11 Doc 639 Filed 11/21/17 Entered 11/21/17 13:18:18 Page 1 of 14

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

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 09/09/2014 Page 1 of 1

Case 2:16-cv SWS Document 218 Filed 04/06/18 Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

Case 9:13-cv WPD Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/01/2013 Page 1 of 7

Case 1:12-cv ABJ Document 1 Filed 02/29/12 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

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

ORIGINAL RECEIVED 2 Z015 ) ) ) ) ) ) PETITION FOR ) REVIEW ) ) ) No DEC FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA C

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

In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:13-cv KBJ Document 46 Filed 03/20/17 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Petitioner v. CHANBOND, LLC Patent Owner

Case: swd Doc #:288 Filed: 01/18/13 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN ) ) ) ) ) )

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

FOR DISTRIGT OF COLUMBIA 9fHE UNITED STATES COURT OF URAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION; BASIN ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE; EAST

Case 3:17-mc G Document 1 Filed 03/06/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

No IN THE United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. HO-CHUNK, INC. et al., Appellant,

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 NINTH CIRCUIT MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

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

mew Doc 913 Filed 07/14/17 Entered 07/14/17 17:16:19 Main Document Pg 1 of 16

Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 05-CV LTS-JCF Hon. Laura Taylor Swain

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

STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT DANE COUNTY. ROBERT DALLAS NEWTON, JR. 135 W. Washington St. Brandon, WI 53919, PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 07/27/18 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNOPOSSED PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT S AMENDED MOTION FOR COURT S APPROVAL TO ELECTRONIC FILE CASE DOCUMENTS VIA CM/ECF SYSTEM 1

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case mgd Doc 414 Filed 11/21/17 Entered 11/21/17 16:12:38 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 14

U.S. District Court District of Columbia (Washington, DC) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:14 cv JDB

pìéêéãé=`çìêí=çñ=íüé=råáíéç=pí~íéë=

Case: 3:17-cv GFVT-EBA Doc #: 32-1 Filed: 06/12/18 Page: 1 of 14 - Page ID#: 217

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

Case 2:17-cv JS Document 59 Filed 05/10/18 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Transcription:

UNITED STJ1.TES COURT OF APPEALS FOH DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUlT >,. r AUG}82214~E'~NITEDSTATESCOURTOF EA~. 0 RECEIVED -yo. THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA uifjg Y'lr1...... NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS,.' "I!J 20!/+,--""",,,,",,=.=-"~."- CLERK v. Petitioner, No. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents. PETITION FOR REVIEW Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 402(a), 28 U.S.C. 2342(1) and 2344, and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 15(a)" the National Association of Broadcasters ("NAB") hereby petitions this Court for review of the final order of the Federal Communications Commission ("Commission") captioned Expanding the Economic and Innovative Opportunities of Spectrum Through Incentive Auctions, Report and Order, GN Dkt. No. 12-268 (rei. June 2, 2014) ("Order"). This Order was published in the Federal Register on August 15, 2014. See 79 Fed. Reg. 48,442 (Aug. 15, 2014). A copy of the Order is attached as Exhibit A to this petition for review.

Venue lies in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2343. NAB is a nonprofit trade association that advocates before Congress, the Commission and other agencies, and federal courts on behalf of its members, which include thousands of local radio and television stations and broadcast networks. NAB's members are aggrieved and otherwise injured by the Order, and NAB participated in the proceedings below. See 28 U.S.C. 2344. In the Order, the Commission addressed various aspects of its impending incentive auction of broadcast television spectrum pursuant to Title VI of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. 112-96, 6403, 126 Stat. 156, 225-30 (the "Spectrum Act"). Under the Spectrum Act, the auction is designed so that broadcast television licensees, including NAB's members, may voluntarily relinquish their spectrum usage rights in exchange for compensation. See 47 U.S.C. 1452(a). The Commission would then reorganize the remaining broadcast spectrum and auction blocks of cleared spectrum to wireless providers, subject to the statutory command that it protect broadcasters that do not relinquish their spectrum usage rights by "mak[ing] all reasonable efforts to preserve, as of February 22, 2012, the coverage area and population served of each broadcast television licensee, as determined using the methodology described in OET Bulletin 69." Id. 1452(b)(2). Among other objectionable provisions, however, the Order adopts a new methodology, TVStudy, for calculating broadcasters' 2

broadcasters' coverage areas and populations served and fails to take reasonable steps to preserve broadcasters' coverage areas. See 79 Fed. Reg. at 48,451. Under this new methodology, many broadcast television licensees, including NAB's members, will lose coverage area and population served during the auction's repacking and reassignment process, or be forced to participate in the auction (and relinquish broadcast spectrum rights). NAB seeks review of the Order on the grounds that it: (1) violates the Spectrum Act; (2) is arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion under the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA"), 5 U.S.C. 706(2); (3) was adopted in violation of the APA's notice requirements, see id. 553(b)-(c); and (4) is otherwise contrary to law. Accordingly, NAB respectfully requests that this Court hold unlawful, vacate, enjoin, and set aside the Commission's adoption of TVStudy in the Order and grant such additional relief as may be necessary and appropriate. 3

Dated: August 18, 2014 Respectfully submitted, Rick Kaplan Jane E. Mago NA nonal ASSOClA non OF BROADCASTERS 1771 N Street, N.W. Telephone: (202) 429-5430 Miguel A. Estrada Counsel of Record Scott P. Martin Lucas C. Townsend Ashley S. Boizelle GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 1050 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Telephone: (202) 955-8500 Facsimile: (202) 467-0539 Attorneys for Petitioner National Association of Broadcasters v 4

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS, v. Petitioner, No. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS C01\1MISSION and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents. CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1 and this Court's Rule 26.1, Petitioner National Association of Broadcasters ("NAB") states as follows: NAB is a nonprofit, incorporated association of radio and television stations. It has no parent company, and has not issued any shares or debt securities to the. public; thus no publicly-held company owns ten percent or more of its stock. As a continuing association of numerous organizations operated for the purpose of promoting the interests of its membership, the coalition is a trade association for purposes of D.C. Circuit Rule 26.1.

Dated: August 18, 2014 Respectfully submitted, Rick Kaplan Jane E. Mago NATIONAL ASSOCIA non OF BROADCASTERS 1771 N Street, N. W. Telephone: (202) 429-5430 Migue A. Estrada Counsel of Record Scott P. Martin Lucas C. Townsend Ashley S. Boizelle GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 1050 Connecticut Ave., N. W. Telephone: (202) 955-8500 Facsimile: (202) 467-0539 Attorneys for Petitioner National Association of Broadcasters 6