C53AA104d01 - Page 1 1 of 2 DOCUMENTS BRAND X INTERNET...

Info icon This preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
1 of 2 DOCUMENTS BRAND X INTERNET SERVICES, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Respondent. EARTHLINK, INC., Petitioner, SBC COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Intervenor, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Respondent. VERIZON TELEPHONE COMPANIES, Verizon Internet Solutions d/b/a Verizon.Net, Petitioner, SBC COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Intervenor, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Respondent. CONSUMER FEDERATION OF AMERICA; CONSUMERS UNION; CENTER FOR DIGITAL DEMOCRACY, Petitioners, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Respondent. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA EX REL. BILL LOCKYER; PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Petitioners, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents. NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES; NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS OFFICERS AND ADVISORS; UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF MAYORS; NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES; TEXAS COALITION OF CITIES FOR UTILITY ISSUES, Petitioners, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Respondent. CONESTOGA TOWNSHIP; PROVIDENCE TOWNSHIP; MARTIC TOWNSHIP; BUCKINGHAM TOWNSHIP; EAST HEMPFIELD TOWNSHIP, Petitioners, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents. No. 02-70518, No. 02-70684, No. 02-70685, No. 02-70686, No. 02-70879, No. 02-71425, No. 02-72251 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 345 F.3d 1120 ; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 20306; 2003 Cal. Daily Op. Service 8915; 30 Comm. Reg. (P & F) 637 May 8, 2003, Argued and Submitted, Seattle, Washington October 6, 2003, Filed SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: Rehearing denied by, Rehearing, en banc, denied by Brand X Internet Servs. v. FCC, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 8023 (9th Cir., Mar. 31, 2004) US Supreme Court certiorari granted by Nat'l Cable & Telecomms. Ass'n v. Brand X Internet Servs., 160 L. Ed. 2d 494, 125 S. Ct. 654, 2004 U.S. LEXIS 7981 (U.S., 2004) US Supreme Court certiorari granted by FCC v. Brand X Internet Servs., 160 L. Ed. 2d 494, 125 S. Ct. 655, 2004 U.S. LEXIS 7980 (U.S., 2004) US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Nat'l League of Cities v. FCC, 160 L. Ed. 2d 497, 125 S. Ct. 664, 2004 U.S. LEXIS 7998 (U.S., 2004) Reversed by, Remanded by Nat'l Cable & Telcoms. Ass'n v. Brand X Internet Servs., 2005 U.S. LEXIS 5018 (U.S., June 27, 2005) PRIOR HISTORY: [**1] Petition for Review of an Order of the Federal Communications Commission. FCC No. FCC-Act 2-77, FCC No. FCC-02-77, FCC No. FCC-02-1100, FCC No. FCC-02-77, FCC Nos. GN-00-185, CS-02-52, FCC Nos. GN-00-185, CS-02-52, FCC No. FCC-02-52. Page 1
Image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
DISPOSITION: Affirmed in part and vacated in part and remanded. CASE SUMMARY: PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Petitioners, corporations, organizations, and the State of California, challenged a ruling from respondent Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that cable modem service was properly classified as an interstate information service, not as a cable service, and that there was no separate offering of telecommunications service. OVERVIEW: The FCC issued a ruling that cable modem service was properly classified as an interstate information service, not as a cable service, and that there was no separate offering of telecommunications service. Petitioners challenged the FCC's ruling. Petitioners did not challenge the FCC's conclusion that cable modem service was an information service. Rather, petitioners contended that the FCC should have made additional determinations. The court
Image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.
  • Spring '10
  • Sandhous
  • Supreme Court of the United States, Internet service provider, Broadband Internet access, Cable modem, Cable Modem Service

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern