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

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

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

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

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

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

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 APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION P.O. BOX 3265, HARRISBURG, PA June 23, 2016

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

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

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

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMl\USSION 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

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

No Charter Advanced Services (MN), LLC, et al.,

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

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

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

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

Telecom Update 2016 Outlook 2017

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

United States Court of Appeals For The Eighth Circuit Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse 111 South 10th Street, Room St. Louis, Missouri 63102

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

Role of Small Cell Infrastructure Legal/Regulatory Background

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

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

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

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

MAJOR COURT DECISIONS, 2006

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

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

VERIZON NEW HAMPSHIRE /BULLSEYE TELECOM, INC.

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

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

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

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

COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGULATORY UTILITY COMMISSIONERS

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED 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

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

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

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

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

Mark R. Ortlieb AVP-Senior Legal Counsel Legal/State Regulatory. October 26, 2017

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

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

1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 12 th Floor Washington, D.C October 30, 2014

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

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

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

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER. Adopted: August 2, 2010 Released: August 2, 2010

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Appellants-Plaintiffs, V. CASE NO Appellee-Defendant, Appellee-Intervenor-Defendant.

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER. Adopted: May 31, 2007 Released: May 31, 2007

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

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

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

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

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

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. SIERRA CLUB; and VIRGINIA WILDERNESS COMMITTEE,

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

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

VERIZON NEW HAMPSHIRE/BIDDEFORD INTERNET CORPORATION

In The Supreme Court of the United States

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

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

Willard receives federal Universal Service Fund ( USF ) support as a cost company, not a price cap company.

Colorado PUC E-Filings System

Case 2:16-cv SWS Document 226 Filed 04/16/18 Page 1 of 7

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

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

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

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

Case 1:12-cv JDB Document 25-2 Filed 08/20/12 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case: Document: 484 Page: 1 08/06/

No Charter Advanced Services (MN), LLC; Charter Advanced Services, VIII (MN), LLC, vs.

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 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

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

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

Federal Communications Commission DA Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ORDER

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

Regulatory Studies Program. Public Interest Comment on Establishing Procedural Requirements to Govern Section 10 Forbearance Petition Proceedings 1

ENTERED JUN This is an electronic copy. Attachments may not appear. BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON

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

Transcription:

BEFORE THE UNITED STATATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGULATORY UTILITY COMMISSIONERS v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, et al. Case No. 16-1170 MOTION TO INTERVENE OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE UTILITY CONSUMER ADVOCATES IN SUPPORT OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGULATIRY UTILITY COMMISSIONERS The National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates ( NASUCA moves to intervene in this appeal by the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners ( NARUC, which implicates the interests of consumers of telecommunications and related services throughout the United States. The appeal challenges the Federal Communications Commission ( FCC Broadband Lifeline Order, 1 which improperly limited the state jurisdiction over eligible telecommunications carriers ( ETCs dictated in 47 U.S.C. 214(e. This motion is made pursuant to FRAP 15(d and Circuit Rule 15(d. 1 Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization, WC Docket No. 11-42, et al., Third Report and Order, Further Report and Order, and Order on Reconsideration, FCC 16-38 (rel. April 27, 2016 ( Broadband Lifeline Order. 1

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 Broadband Lifeline Order. 2 NASUCA s standing on appeal of FCC orders affecting consumers has been recognized in this circuit and elsewhere. NASUCA intervened and signed on to an intervenor brief in United States Telecom Ass n v. FCC, D.C. Cir Case No. 15-2 See, e.g., WC Docket No. 11-42, et al., NASUCA Comments (August 31. 2015; NASUCA Reply Comments (September 24, 2015; NASUCA ex parte communication (March 24, 2016. 2

1063 (issued June 14, 2016. This Circuit heard NASUCA s appeal of FCC unbundling rules in Covad v. FCC, 450 F.3d 528 (D.C. Cir., 2006. 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 basis of NARUC s appeal: That the FCC improperly pre-empted state jurisdiction over ETCs. 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, DAVID SPRINGE, 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 3

(614 771-5979 David.c.bergmann@gmail.com 4

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 5

RULE 261 STATEMENT 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. 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. 6