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

Similar documents
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 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

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

ReCEIVED FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCU CLERK

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

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 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No John Teixeira; et al., Plaintiffs/Appellants,

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

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

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

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

Case: Document: 6 Filed: 11/03/2016 Pages: 6 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

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

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

Case No IN THE United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit DAVID JOHN SLATER, WILDLIFE PERSONALITIES, LTD.,

No No CV LRS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Plaintiffs-Appellants, Decision Filed Mar. 5, 2014 ED PRIETO; COUNTY OF YOLO,

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

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

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

Supreme Court of the United States

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMl\USSION Washington D.C

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

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No TODD S. GLASSEY AND MICHAEL E. MCNEIL,

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

Nos , IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, DC ) ) ) ) )

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

No ORAL ARGUMENT HELD JUNE 1, 2015 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Petitioners, Real Parties in Interest.

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

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No

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

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

Amici curiae, Disability Rights Legal Center, Disability Rights Advocates,

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

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

JOHN TEIXEIRA, et al., Appellants, vs. COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, et al., Appellees. Northern District of California REHEARING EN BANG

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. REBECCA FRIEDRICHS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,

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

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

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

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE 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

Nos , IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

Case 2:16-cv NDF Document 29 Filed 03/23/17 Page 1 of 9

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. CLEAN AIR COUNCIL, et al.,

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, JEFFREY ALEXANDER STERLING, and JAMES RISEN,

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

Nos , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT. PARKERVISION, INC., a Florida corporation,

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

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

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

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

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554

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

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

Docket No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

PlainSite. Legal Document. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Case No Nutrivita Laboratories, Inc. v. VBS Distribution, Inc.

Tel: (202)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. VALERIE SOTO, as Guardian Ad Litem of Y.D., a minor, Plaintiff-Appellant,

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

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR MAY 8, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

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

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Petitioners, Respondents. CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

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

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

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

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case 3:13-cv SC Document 39 Filed 01/09/14 Page 1 of 5

Before The Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

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

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

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

MOTION F'OR JOINDER OF PLAINTIFF'S.APPELLEES AND PUTATIVE PLAINTIF'F.APPELLEE REPUBLICAN PARTY OF NEVADA

Customer Name: Neutral Tandem

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

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

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

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Transcription:

Case: 18-70506, 03/16/2018, ID: 10802297, DktEntry: 33, Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT County of Santa Clara and Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District, Petitioners, v. No. 18-70506 (and consolidated cases) Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Respondents. MOTION OF AMERICAN CABLE ASSOCIATION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE American Cable Association ( ACA ) hereby moves, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 402(e), 28 U.S.C. 2348, Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 15(d), and Ninth Circuit Rule 15-1, for leave to intervene as of right in support of respondents Federal Communications Commission ( FCC ) and the United States. Counsel for ACA has contacted counsel for petitioners and respondents, and none stated that they intend to oppose ACA s motion to intervene. Petitioners seek review of the FCC s Declaratory Ruling, Report and Order, and Order, Restoring Internet Freedom, WC Docket No. 17-108, FCC 17-166 (rel. Jan. 4, 2018) (the Declaratory Ruling ). 1 That ruling addresses the regulatory treatment of broadband Internet access service under the Communications Act of 1 Published in the Federal Register as Restoring Internet Freedom, 83 Fed. Reg. 7,852 (Feb. 22, 2018).

Case: 18-70506, 03/16/2018, ID: 10802297, DktEntry: 33, Page 2 of 6 1934. Under the Communications Act, telecommunications services are subject to common-carrier obligations under Title II of the Act. By contrast, information services are exempt from common-carrier treatment. For decades, the FCC had classified broadband Internet access service as an information service. 2 In 2015, the FCC reclassified broadband service as a Title II telecommunications service to impose new net neutrality rules. 3 The Declaratory Ruling restores the FCC s earlier determination that broadband service is instead an information service. ACA meets the requirements for intervention. ACA is a trade association of small and medium-sized cable companies that regularly represents its members and their interests before regulatory agencies such as the FCC, including in the proceedings below. 4 Many of ACA s members provide broadband Internet access service, and thus are directly affected by the Declaratory Ruling. Yakima Valley Cablevision, Inc. v. FCC, 794 F.2d 737, 744-45 (D.C. Cir. 1986). ACA thus seeks to intervene to ensure that its members interests are adequately represented in this Court s review. CONCLUSION The motion to intervene should be granted. 2 See Declaratory Ruling 6-13. 3 Report and Order on Remand, Declaratory Ruling, and Order, Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet, GN Docket No. 14-28, FCC 15-24 (Mar. 12, 2015). 4 Comments of ACA, FCC, WC Docket No. 17-108 (July 17, 2017); Reply Comments of ACA, FCC, WC Docket No. 17-108 (August 30, 2017). 2

Case: 18-70506, 03/16/2018, ID: 10802297, DktEntry: 33, Page 3 of 6 March 16, 2018 Respectfully submitted, Ross J. Lieberman AMERICAN CABLE ASSOCIATION 2415 39th Place, NW Washington, D.C. 20007 (202) 494-5661 /s/ Jeffrey A. Lamken Jeffrey A. Lamken Rayiner I. Hashem MOLOLAMKEN LLP The Watergate, Suite 660 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20037 (202) 556-2000 jlamken@mololamken.com Counsel for American Cable Association

Case: 18-70506, 03/16/2018, ID: 10802297, DktEntry: 33, Page 4 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT County of Santa Clara and Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District, Petitioners, v. No. 18-70506 (and consolidated cases) Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Respondents. CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to Rule 26.1 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, American Cable Association ( ACA ) states as follows: ACA has no parent corporation and no publicly held corporation owns 10% or more of its stock, pays 10% or more of its dues, or possesses or exercises 10% or more of the voting control of ACA. As relevant to this litigation, ACA is a trade association of small and medium-sized cable companies, many of which provide broadband Internet access service. ACA is principally engaged in representing the interests of its members before Congress and regulatory agencies such as the Federal Communications Commission.

Case: 18-70506, 03/16/2018, ID: 10802297, DktEntry: 33, Page 5 of 6 March 16, 2018 Respectfully submitted, Ross J. Lieberman AMERICAN CABLE ASSOCIATION 2415 39th Place, NW Washington, D.C. 20007 (202) 494-5661 /s/ Jeffrey A. Lamken Jeffrey A. Lamken Rayiner I. Hashem MOLOLAMKEN LLP The Watergate, Suite 660 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20037 (202) 556-2000 jlamken@mololamken.com Counsel for American Cable Association

Case: 18-70506, 03/16/2018, ID: 10802297, DktEntry: 33, Page 6 of 6 9th Circuit Case Number(s) 18-70506 and consolidated cases NOTE: To secure your input, you should print the filled-in form to PDF (File > Print > PDF Printer/Creator). ********************************************************************************* CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE When All Case Participants are Registered for the Appellate CM/ECF System I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system on (date). I certify that all participants in the case are registered CM/ECF users and that service will be accomplished by the appellate CM/ECF system. Signature (use "s/" format) ********************************************************************************* CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE When Not All Case Participants are Registered for the Appellate CM/ECF System I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system on (date). 3/16/2018 Participants in the case who are registered CM/ECF users will be served by the appellate CM/ECF system. I further certify that some of the participants in the case are not registered CM/ECF users. I have mailed the foregoing document by First-Class Mail, postage prepaid, or have dispatched it to a third party commercial carrier for delivery within 3 calendar days to the following non-cm/ecf participants: Kevin Anderson (North Carolina Department of Justice); Andrew G. Beshear (Office of the Kentucky Attorney General); Christopher J. Curtis (Office of the Vermont Attorney General); Michael W. Field (Office of the Rhode Island Attorney General); Lisa A. Hayes (Center for Democracy & Technology); Katherine T. Kelly (Attorney General of Minnesota); Crystal Utley Secoy (Mississippi Attorney General's Office) Signature (use "s/" format) /s/ Jeffrey A. Lamken