United States Ninth Circuit

In a case interpreting sections 253(a) and 332(c)(7) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the grant of permanent injunction against San Diego County enforcing its Wireless Telecommunications Facilities ordinance is reversed where: 1) to violate either sections 253(a) or 332(c)(7), the ordinance must outright prohibit or effectively prohibit the provision of a telecommunications service; and 2) plaintiff did not identify any requirements in the ordinance that effectively prohibit it from providing wireless service.

Appellate Information

• Argued 06/24/2008
• Decided 09/11/2008
• Published 09/11/2008

Judges

• Before:  ALEX KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, and ANDREW J. KLEINFELD, HAWKINS, A. WALLACE TASHIMA, SIDNEY R. THOMAS, BARRY G. SILVERMAN, SUSAN P. GRABER, RONALD M. GOULD, MARSHA S. BERZON, RICHARD C. TALLMAN, and JAY S. BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Andrew G. McBride and Joshua S. Turner, Wiley Rein LLP, Washington, DC;  William K. Sanders, Deputy City Attorney, San Francisco, CA;  Joseph Van Eaton, Miller & Van Eaton, P.L.L.C., Washington, DC;  John J. Flynn III, Nossaman, Guthner, Knox & Elliott, LLP, Irvine, CA;  T. Scott Thompson, Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP, Washington, DC;  and Elaine Duncan and Jesus G. Roman, Verizon California, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, for amici curiae.


• For Appellees:
  
• Daniel T. Pascucci and Nathan R. Hamler, Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC, San Diego, CA, for the plaintiff-appellant/cross-appellee., Thomas D. Bunton, Senior Deputy County Counsel, County of San Diego, San Diego, CA, for the defendants-appellees-cross-appellants.