United States DC Circuit

In a petition by wireless telephone service providers serving primarily small and rural markets for review of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) decision to impose an interim cap on subsidy payments, the petition is denied where: 1) petitioners could not allege any actual injury fairly traceable to either adjudicatory order; 2) the FCC complied with each of the Administrative Procedure Act's rulemaking requirements; and 3) that the Commission, in the face of evidence showing providers were receiving subsidies in excess of what was needed to allow them to remain in the market, chose to consider its interest in avoiding excessive funding from consumers was entirely reasonable.

Appellate Information

• Argued 10/05/2009
• Decided 12/11/2009
• Published 12/11/2009

Judges

• Before:  TATEL and BROWN, Circuit Judges, and WILLIAMS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Court

• United States DC Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• David A. LaFuria argued the cause for petitioners.   With him on the briefs were Russell D. Lukas and David L. Nace., Donald J. Evans was on the brief for amicus curiae Corr Wireless Communications, LLC in support of petitioners., Helgi C. Walker argued the cause for intervenors AT & T Inc. and Verizon.   With her on the brief were Michael E. Glover, Edward Shakin, Christopher M. Miller, John T. Scott III, and Gary L. Phillips.


• For Appellees:
  
• Maureen K. Flood, Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, argued the cause for respondents.   With her on the brief were Robert B. Nicholson and Kristen C. Limarzi, Attorneys, U.S. Department of Justice, Matthew B. Berry, General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, Joseph R. Palmore, Deputy General Counsel, Richard K. Welch, Deputy Associate General Counsel, and Laurence N. Bourne, Counsel.