47 C.F.R. § 1.429

Petition for reconsideration of final orders in rulemaking proceedings

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

(a) Any interested person may petition for reconsideration of a final action in a proceeding conducted under this subpart (see §§ 1.407 and 1.425). Where the action was taken by the Commission, the petition will be acted on by the Commission. Where action was taken by a staff official under delegated authority, the petition may be acted on by the staff official or referred to the Commission for action.

Note:

The staff has been authorized to act on rulemaking proceedings described in § 1.420 and is authorized to make editorial changes in the rules (see § 0.231(d)).

(b) A petition for reconsideration which relies on facts or arguments which have not previously been presented to the Commission will be granted only under the following circumstances:

(1) The facts or arguments relied on relate to events which have occurred or circumstances which have changed since the last opportunity to present such matters to the Commission;

(2) The facts or arguments relied on were unknown to petitioner until after his last opportunity to present them to the Commission, and he could not through the exercise of ordinary diligence have learned of the facts or arguments in question prior to such opportunity; or

(3) The Commission determines that consideration of the facts or arguments relied on is required in the public interest.

(c) The petition for reconsideration shall state with particularity the respects in which petitioner believes the action taken should be changed.

(d) The petition for reconsideration and any supplement thereto shall be filed within 30 days from the date of public notice of such action, as that date is defined in § 1.4(b). No supplement to a petition for reconsideration filed after expiration of the 30 day period will be considered, except upon leave granted pursuant to a separate pleading stating the grounds for acceptance of the supplement. The petition for reconsideration shall not exceed 25 double-spaced typewritten pages. See also § 1.49(f).

(e) Except as provided in § 1.420(f), petitions for reconsideration need not be served on parties to the proceeding. (However, where the number of parties is relatively small, the Commission encourages the service of petitions for reconsideration and other pleadings, and agreements among parties to exchange copies of pleadings. See also § 1.47(d) regarding electronic service of documents.) When a petition for reconsideration is timely filed in proper form, public notice of its filing is published in the Federal Register. The time for filing oppositions to the petition runs from the date of public notice. See § 1.4(b).

(f) Oppositions to a petition for reconsideration shall be filed within 15 days after the date of public notice of the petition's filing and need be served only on the person who filed the petition. See also § 1.49(d). Oppositions shall not exceed 25 double-spaced typewritten pages. See § 1.49(f).

(g) Replies to an opposition shall be filed within 10 days after the time for filing oppositions has expired and need be served only on the person who filed the opposition. Replies shall not exceed 10 double-spaced typewritten pages. See also §§ 1.49(d) and 1.49(f).

(h) Petitions for reconsideration, oppositions and replies shall conform to the requirements of §§ 1.49 and 1.52, except that they need not be verified. Except as provided in § 1.420(e), an original and 11 copies shall be submitted to the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554, by mail, by commercial courier, by hand, or by electronic submission through the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System. Petitions submitted only by electronic mail and petitions submitted directly to staff without submission to the Secretary shall not be considered to have been properly filed. Parties filing in electronic form need only submit one copy.

(i) The Commission may grant the petition for reconsideration in whole or in part or may deny or dismiss the petition. Its order will contain a concise statement of the reasons for the action taken. Any order addressing a petition for reconsideration which modifies rules adopted by the original order is, to the extent of such modification, subject to reconsideration in the same manner as the original order. Except in such circumstance, a second petition for reconsideration may be dismissed by the staff as repetitious. In no event shall a ruling which denies a petition for reconsideration be considered a modification of the original order.

(j) The filing of a petition for reconsideration is not a condition precedent to judicial review of any action taken by the Commission, except where the person seeking such review was not a party to the proceeding resulting in the action or relies on questions of fact or law upon which the Commission has been afforded no opportunity to pass. Subject to the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section, such a person may qualify to seek judicial review by filing a petition for reconsideration.

(k) Without special order of the Commission, the filing of a petition for reconsideration shall not excuse any person from complying with any rule or operate in any manner to stay or postpone its enforcement. However, upon good cause shown, the Commission will stay the effective date of a rule pending a decision on a petition for reconsideration. See, however, § 1.420(f).

(l) Petitions for reconsideration of a Commission action that plainly do not warrant consideration by the Commission may be dismissed or denied by the relevant bureau(s) or office(s). Examples include, but are not limited to, petitions that:

(1) Fail to identify any material error, omission, or reason warranting reconsideration;

(2) Rely on facts or arguments which have not previously been presented to the Commission and which do not meet the requirements of paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section;

(3) Rely on arguments that have been fully considered and rejected by the Commission within the same proceeding;

(4) Fail to state with particularity the respects in which petitioner believes the action taken should be changed as required by paragraph (c) of this section;

(5) Relate to matters outside the scope of the order for which reconsideration is sought;

(6) Omit information required by these rules to be included with a petition for reconsideration;

(7) Fail to comply with the procedural requirements set forth in paragraphs (d), (e), and (h) of this section;

(8) Relate to an order for which reconsideration has been previously denied on similar grounds, except for petitions which could be granted under paragraph (b) of this section; or

(9) Are untimely.

(Secs. 4, 303, 307, 48 Stat., as amended, 1066, 1082, 1083; 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 307) [41 FR 1287, Jan. 7, 1976, as amended at 44 FR 5436, Jan. 26, 1979; 46 FR 18556, Mar. 25, 1981; 52 FR 49161, Dec. 30, 1987; 63 FR 24126, May 1, 1998; 76 FR 24392, May 2, 2011]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1977–2023 · leading case: Am. Radio Relay League, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 524 F.3d 227 (D.C. Cir. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Am. Radio Relay League, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 524 F.3d 227 (D.C. Cir. 2008). · cites it 2× “[3] Although the League did not seek further reconsideration as Commission rules allow, see 47 C.F.R. § 1.429 (i), the Commission was previously alerted to the League's concern about preserving shutdown protection and has not contested the League's ability to raise this issue.”

City of Peoria v. Gen. Elec. Cablevision Corp. (Gecco), & Third-Party v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, Third-Party, 690 F.2d 116 (3rd Cir. 1982). “Though it would not have accepted a petition for reconsideration as such, because the time for filing such a petition expired long ago, see 47 C.F.R. § 1.429 (d), Peoria could have gotten the same relief either by seeking a declaration of its rights under 47 C.”

New England Tel. & Tel. Co., Etc. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n of Maine, 742 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1984). “, 47 C.F.R. § 1.429 (i); Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.”

Robert W Mauthe MD PC v. Millennium Health LLC, 58 F.4th 93 (3rd Cir. 2023). “47 C.F.R. § 1.429 (authorizing petitions for reconsideration).”

Action for Child.'s Television v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 564 F.2d 458 (D.C. Cir. 1977). “§ 405 (1970), certainly supports this contention: The filing of a petition for rehearing shall not be a condition precedent to judicial review of any such order, decision, report, or action, except where the party seeking such review . . . relies on questions of fact or law upon…”

Sioux Valley Rural Television, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 349 F.3d 667 (D.C. Cir. 2003). “See 47 C.F.R. § 1.429 (d) (2000). The rules also require a petitioner to state with particularity the basis for reconsideration.”

In Re Wireless Tel. Radio Frequency Emissions Prods. Liab. Litig., 327 F. Supp. 2d 554 (D. Maryland 2004). “They could have filed a petition for reconsideration to challenge the FCC's final regulations, see 47 C.F.R. § 1.429 (a), or could have filed a petition with the FCC to amend or repeal the existing regulations and/or issue new regulations.”

Ntch, Inc. v. Fcc, 950 F.3d 871 (D.C. Cir. 2020). “408, ¶ 20 (citing 47 C.F.R. § 1.429 (l)(5)). In these circumstances, we cannot say that the Commission’s failure to consider stripping Dish of its satellite rights was unreasonable.”

North Am. Telecomm. Ass'n v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 772 F.2d 1282 (7th Cir. 1985). · cites it 2× “The Commission’s rules of procedure, however, contain a catch-all provision that allows the Commission to reconsider its decision de novo even if no new material is presented, see 47 C.F.R. § 1.429 (b)(3), and apparently that is the basis on which the Commission proceeded in the…”

Commty TV Inc v. FCC, 216 F.3d 1133 (D.C. Cir. 2000). “See 47 C.F.R. 1.429(d). To the extent that the FCC was obliged to articulate its reasons for not granting leave, its failure to do so was harmless.”

Murray v. Motorola, Inc., 327 F. Supp. 2d 554 (D. Maryland 2004). “They could have filed a petition for reconsideration to challenge the FCC’s final regulations, see 47 C.F.R. § 1.429 (a), or could have filed a petition with the FCC to amend or repeal the existing regulations and/or issue new regulations.”

Cmty. Television, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 216 F.3d 1133 (D.C. Cir. 2000). “See 47 C.F.R. § 1.429 (d). To the extent that the FCC was obliged to articulate its reasons for not granting leave, its failure to do so was harmless.”

— 47 C.F.R. § 1.429(d) — 1 case

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.