How cited: United States Telephone Association v. Federal Communications Commission and United State… · Go Syfert

United States Telephone Association v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, At&t Corporation, Intervenors (1999)

green · 43 citation events across 5 courts. Showing the 20 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
200020132026
Rule Authority · SCOTUS · 4 citations in this opinion
The regulatory response in some markets was adoption of a rate-based method commonly called “price caps,” United States Telephone Assn. v. FCC, 188 F. 3d 521, 524 (CADC 1999), as, for example, by the FCC’s setting of maximum access charges paid to large local-exchange com panies by interexchange carriers, In re Policy and Rules Concerning Rates for Dominant Carriers, 5 FCC Rcd. 6786, 6787, ¶ 1 (1990).
Rule Authority · D.C. Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
Cir. 2012), we must consider this argument even though it was raised only by industry intervenors, see U.S. Telephone Association v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 531 (D.C.
explaining the general “rule against consideration of issues raised by intervenors and not by petitioners”
Rule Authority · D.C. Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
Ass'n v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 531 (D.C.Cir.1999).
Rule Authority · D.C. Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
Ass'n v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 531 (D.C.Cir. 1999)).
Rule Authority · D.C. Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
Ass'n v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 531 (D.C.Cir.1999).
Rule Authority · 5th Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
TOPUC I, 188 F.3d at 421 (analyzing § 254(b)(3)).
Rule Authority · 10th Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
Ass’n v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 530-31 (D.C.Cir.1999).
Rule Authority · 10th Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
Ass'n v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 530-31 (D.C.
Rule Authority · D.C. Cir.
Ass’n v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 531 (D.C.
explaining that the agency “may of course request a stay,” which was subsequently granted, see Order Granting Mot. to Stay Mandate, 188 F.3d 521 , No. 97-1469 (June 21, 1999)
Rule Authority · D.C. Cir.
Ass'n v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 531 (D.C.Cir.1999); Columbia Falls Aluminum Co. v. EPA, 139 F.3d 914, 924 (D.C.Cir.1998); Envtl.
Rule Authority · D.C. Cir.
Ass’n v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 531 (D.C.
Rule Authority · D.C. Cir.
Ass’n v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 531 (D.C.Cir.1999); Columbia Falls Aluminum Co. v. EPA, 139 F.3d 914, 924 (D.C.Cir.1998); Envtl.
Rule Authority · D.C. Cir.
Ass’n v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 531 (D.C.Cir.1999).
Rule Authority · D.C. Cir.
Ass’n v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 523-24 (D.C.Cir.1999).
Rule Authority · D.C. Cir.
Ass'n v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 523-24 (D.C.Cir.1999). 5 .
Rule Authority · D.C. Cir.
Further, the Commission gives no explanation as to why any outlier should be removed, see United States Telephone Assn. v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 525 (D.C.Cir.1999) (agency eliminating outlying data points must explain “why the outliers were unreliable or their use inappropriate”), much less why a low outlier should be removed and a high one retained.
Rule Authority · D.C. Cir.
Further, the Commission gives no explanation as to why any outlier should be removed, see United States Telephone Assn. v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 525 (D.C.
agency eliminating outlying data points must explain "why the outliers were unreliable or their use inappropriate"
Rule Authority · S.D. Iowa
Assoc. v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 523 (D.C.Cir.1999), which is not a local competition function to be governed by the reciprocal compensation rules.
Cited · D.C. Cir. · signal: see
See United States Telephone Association v. FCC, 188 F.3d 521, 531 (D.C.Cir.1999) (noting that intervenors not only failed to qualify for the Synovus exception but “presented] no reason why it could not have petitioned in its own right”).
green TX Ofc Pub Util v. FCC (2001)
Cited · 5th Cir. · signal: see
See USTA, 188 F.3d at 525 . 48 In its CALLS Order, the FCC reintroduced the same 6.5 percent X-Factor, but stated that the revamped X-Factor serves a different function as a "transitional mechanism that operates to reduce rates at a certain pace, and [is no longer] . . . linked to a specific measure of productivity." CALLS Order, ¶ 140.