47 C.F.R. § 24.51

Equipment authorization

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

(a) Each transmitter utilized for operation under this part and each transmitter marketed, as set forth in § 2.803 of this chapter, must be of a type that has been authorized by the Commission under its certification procedure for use under this part.

(b) Any manufacturer of radio transmitting equipment to be used in these services may request equipment authorization following the procedures set forth in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter. Equipment authorization for an individual transmitter may be requested by an applicant for a station authorization by following the procedures set forth in part 2 of this chapter.

[58 FR 59183, Nov. 8, 1993. Redesignated at 59 FR 18499, Apr. 19, 1994, as amended at 63 FR 36604, July 7, 1998; 85 FR 18150, Apr. 1, 2020]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2003–2005 · leading case: Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., 402 F.3d 430 (4th Cir. 2005).
Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., 402 F.3d 430 (4th Cir. 2005). · cites it 2× “See 47 C.F.R. §§ 24.51 (b); 24.52. Because the relief sought by the Naquin plaintiffs would not be a barrier for wireless service providers seeking to enter the PCS market, § 332(c)(3)(A) does not expressly preempt the claims of the Naquin plaintiffs.”
In Re Wireless Tel. Radio Frequency Emissions Prods. Liab. Litig., 248 F. Supp. 2d 452 (D. Maryland 2003). “1093 (2003); "Equipment authorization," 47 C.F.R. § 24.51 (2003); "RF hazards," 47 C.”
Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., 248 F. Supp. 2d 452 (D. Maryland 2003). “1093 (2003); “Equipment authorization,” 47 C.F.R. § 24.51 (2003); “RF hazards,” 47 C.”
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.