47 C.F.R. § 1.41
Informal requests for Commission action
Except where formal procedures are required under the provisions of this chapter, requests for action may be submitted informally. Requests should set forth clearly and concisely the facts relied upon, the relief sought, the statutory and/or regulatory provisions (if any) pursuant to which the request is filed and under which relief is sought, and the interest of the person submitting the request. In application and licensing matters pertaining to the Wireless Radio Services, as defined in § 1.904, such requests must be submitted electronically, via the ULS, and the request must include an email address for receiving electronic service. See § 1.47(d).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1976–2012 · leading case: In re: Tennant, Jame, 359 F.3d 523 (D.C. Cir. 2004).
In re: Tennant, Jame, 359 F.3d 523 (D.C. Cir. 2004). “” 47 C.F.R. § 1.41 . Ten-nant’s letter to the ACHP was at best ambiguous concerning any request for relief from the FCC: he asked the ACHP official “and the individuals listed below” — including the FCC chairman, the director of the National Park Service, Bell-South’s…”
California Metro Mobile Commc'ns, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 365 F.3d 38 (D.C. Cir. 2004). “106 6 and that, because PG&E failed to file its petition within section 405’s 30-day window, the Commission could not consider PG&E’s request as an informal petition under 47 C.F.R. § 1.41 . CMMC also claimed that 47 C.”
Writers Guild of Am., West, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 423 F. Supp. 1064 (C.D. Cal. 1976). “2); (2) to procedures which permit persons to petition for “issuance, amendment or repeal of a rule or regulation” ( 47 C.”
Christian Populist Party v. Sec'y of State, 650 F. Supp. 1205 (E.D. Ark. 1987). “” The Commission has prescribed 47 C.F.R. § 1.41 and §§ 1.701-1.735 to provide for the presentation of com *1211 plaints against broadcasters for alleged violations of the statute.”
Broyde v. Gotham Tower, Inc., 13 F.3d 994 (6th Cir. 1994). “4037 (1992) (noting that FCC action followed the filing by local residents of more than nine hundred blanketing interference complaints); 47 C.F.R. § 1.41 (1992). The residents may also file petitions to deny any license or renewal applications filed with the FCC by the Gotham…”
Cyntje v. Daily News Publ'g Co., 551 F. Supp. 403 (D.V.I. 1982). “§§ 401 , 402. Without deciding whether the plaintiff herein has stated a colorable *315 complaint under the terms of the Commission’s regulations, 4 we find that his present lawsuit raises no genuine issues that entitle him to relief against any of the broadcast defendants.”
Sagan ex rel. Registered Voters v. Pennsylvania Pub. Television Network, 544 A.2d 1309 (Pa. 1988). “See 47 C.F.R. § 1.41 (1987). Moreover, Congress has specified remedies for violations of the Act.”
Michael Levinson v. Kelly McCullough, 495 F. App'x 815 (9th Cir. 2012). “47 C.F.R. § 1.41 ; see The Law of Political *817 Broadcasting and Cablecasting (“Political Primer”), 100 F.”
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.