47 C.F.R. § 1.108

Reconsideration on Commission's own motion

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The Commission may, on its own motion, reconsider any action made or taken by it within 30 days from the date of public notice of such action, as that date is defined in § 1.4(b). When acting on its own motion under this section, the Commission may take any action it could take in acting on a petition for reconsideration, as set forth in § 1.106(k).

[76 FR 24392, May 2, 2011]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1967–2006 · leading case: Sprint Corp. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States of Am., Am. Pub. Commc'ns Council, Inc., Intervenors, 315 F.3d 369 (D.C. Cir. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Sprint Corp. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States of Am., Am. Pub. Commc'ns Council, Inc., Intervenors, 315 F.3d 369 (D.C. Cir. 2003). · cites it 2× “FCC Practice and Procedure, 47 C.F.R. § 1.108 (2001). Underlying these general principles is a distinction between rulemaking and a clarification of an existing rule.”

Cent. Florida Enter., Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, Cowles Broad., Inc., Intervenor, 598 F.2d 37 (D.C. Cir. 1979). · cites it 2× “47 C.F.R. 1.108 (1977). It is Commission practice that the filing of a petition for reconsideration tolls the running of the thirty day period.”

Virgin Islands Tel. Corp. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 444 F.3d 666 (D.C. Cir. 2006). · cites it 2× “at 11,449; see 47 C.F.R. § 1.108 . In this case the Commission ruled that its suspension of the tariff and its initiation of an investigation were sufficient “action[s]” within the meaning of 47 U.”

Spanish Int'l Broad. Co. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, Int'l Panorama Tv, Inc., Intervenor, 385 F.2d 615 (D.C. Cir. 1967). “* * *" 47 C.F.R. § 1.108 (1966). . Supra note 19.”

The Associated Press v. The Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States of Am., Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., Intervenor, 452 F.2d 1290 (D.C. Cir. 1971). “§§ 405 , 415(c) (1964) ; 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.108 (n), 1.718 (1969). Our disposition renders unnecessary any consideration of the issue in that regard.”

Sprint Corp v. FCC (D.C. Cir. 2003). · cites it 2× “FCC Practice and Procedure, 47 C.F.R. § 1.108 (2001). Underlying these general principles is a distinction between rulemaking and a clarification of an existing rule.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.