FCC Web Documents citing 1.1418

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 07 01

• http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2535A1.doc http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2535A1.pdf
  • Please contact J.D. Thomas if you have any questions. Thank you, Grace Kavadoy, SENIOR Paralegal HOGAN & HARTSON LLP Columbia Square, 555 Thirteenth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20004 direct +1.202.637.4863 | cell +1.202.321.3212 | fax +1.202.637.5910 gmkavadoy@hhlaw.com | http://www.hhlaw.com Amended Pole Attachment Access Complaint, File No. EB-08-MD-003 (filed May 12, 2008) (``Complaint''). 47 U.S.C. § 224. 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1404 -1.1418. See Letter from Lisa J. Saks, FCC, to J. D. Thomas, counsel to Fibertech, Shirley S. Fujimoto, counsel to Narragansett, and James Pachulski, counsel to Verizon, File No. EB-08-MD-003 (dated May 27, 2008); Letter from Lia B. Royle, FCC, to J. D. Thomas, Shirley S. Fujimoto, and James Pachulski, File No. EB-08-MD-003 (dated July 3, 2008); Letter from Lisa J.
• http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1312A1.doc http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1312A1.pdf
  • 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418, that the Motion is GRANTED, and that this proceeding IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Alexander P. Starr Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division Enforcement Bureau Pole Attachment Access Complaint, File No. EB-09-MD-004 (filed March 13, 2009) (``Complaint''). 47 U.S.C. § 224. 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1401 -1.1418. See Letters from Lia Royle to Maria T. Browne, counsel to Fibertech, Jack E. Strausman, counsel to Pepco, and James Pachulski, counsel to Verizon, File No. EB-09-MD-004 (dated March 24, 2009 and April 14, 2009). Joint Motion to Dismiss Formal Complaint with Prejudice, File No. EB-09-MD-004 (filed May 29, 2009). (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1312
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1774A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1774A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1774A1.txt
  • the actual or threatened termination of that agreement in the absence of a stay. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION David H. Solomon Chief, Enforcement Bureau Petition To Stay Termination Of Pole Attachment Rights, File No. EB-03-MD-005 (filed April 8, 2003) (``Stay Petition'' or ``Petition''). 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1403(d) and 1.1415. Complaint, File No. EB-03-MD-005 (filed April 8, 2003) (``Complaint''). Sections 1.1401 - 1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1401 - 1.1418, provide complaint and enforcement procedures to ensure that telecommunications carriers and cable system operators have non-discriminatory access to utility poles, ducts, conduits, and rights-of-way on rates, terms and conditions that are just and reasonable. See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1401. Although the Complaint does not cite to these rules, we will
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-857A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-857A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-857A1.txt
  • of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111 and 1.1401-1.1418, that, to the extent that Omnipoint continues to seek access to PECO's facilities, Omnipoint and PECO SHALL NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH maximum just and reasonable rates for pole attachments in accordance with 47 U.S.C. § 224 and the Commission's rules. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 0.111 and 1.1401- 1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111 and 1.1401- 1.1418, that Omnipoint's request for attorney's fees and costs is DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION David H. Solomon Chief, Enforcement Bureau 47 U.S.C. § 224. 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1401-1.1418. Complaint of Omnipoint Corporation, File No. PA 97-002 (filed April 1, 1997) (``Complaint'') at 3. Effective March 25, 2002, the Commission transferred
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2535A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2535A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2535A1.txt
  • Please contact J.D. Thomas if you have any questions. Thank you, Grace Kavadoy, SENIOR Paralegal HOGAN & HARTSON LLP Columbia Square, 555 Thirteenth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20004 direct +1.202.637.4863 | cell +1.202.321.3212 | fax +1.202.637.5910 gmkavadoy@hhlaw.com | http://www.hhlaw.com Amended Pole Attachment Access Complaint, File No. EB-08-MD-003 (filed May 12, 2008) (``Complaint''). 47 U.S.C. § 224. 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1404 -1.1418. See Letter from Lisa J. Saks, FCC, to J. D. Thomas, counsel to Fibertech, Shirley S. Fujimoto, counsel to Narragansett, and James Pachulski, counsel to Verizon, File No. EB-08-MD-003 (dated May 27, 2008); Letter from Lia B. Royle, FCC, to J. D. Thomas, Shirley S. Fujimoto, and James Pachulski, File No. EB-08-MD-003 (dated July 3, 2008); Letter from Lisa J.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1312A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1312A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1312A1.txt
  • 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418, that the Motion is GRANTED, and that this proceeding IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Alexander P. Starr Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division Enforcement Bureau Pole Attachment Access Complaint, File No. EB-09-MD-004 (filed March 13, 2009) (``Complaint''). 47 U.S.C. § 224. 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1401 -1.1418. See Letters from Lia Royle to Maria T. Browne, counsel to Fibertech, Jack E. Strausman, counsel to Pepco, and James Pachulski, counsel to Verizon, File No. EB-09-MD-004 (dated March 24, 2009 and April 14, 2009). Joint Motion to Dismiss Formal Complaint with Prejudice, File No. EB-09-MD-004 (filed May 29, 2009). (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1312
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-170A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-170A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-170A1.txt
  • Census, United States Department of Commerce, then all of that service area shall be designated as urbanized for purposes of determining the presumptive average number of attaching entities. (d) A utility may establish its own presumptive average number of attaching entities for its urbanized and non-urbanized service areas as follows: * * * * * * * * 5. Amend §1.1418 to read as follows: § 1.1418 Use of presumptions in calculating the space factor. With respect to the formulas referenced in Sections 1.1409(e)(1) and (e)(2), the space occupied by an attachment is presumed to be one (1) foot. The amount of usable space is presumed to be 13.5 feet. The amount of unusable space is presumed to be 24 feet.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-84A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-84A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-84A1.txt
  • Ex Parte Letter). See 47 U.S.C. § 224(d). See 47 U.S.C. § 224(e). Calculations under the Commission's rules for the cable and telecom formulas are based on the rebuttable presumptions of one foot for space occupied by an attachment and 37.5 feet for pole height, including 13.5 feet of usable space and 24 feet of unusable space. 47 C.F.R. § 1.1418. Calculations under the Commission's rules for the telecom formula also are based on the Commission's rebuttable presumption of an average of five attaching entities in urban areas and three in non-urban areas. USTelecom Oct. 27, 2008 Ex Parte Letter at 4. See AT&T/Verizon Oct. 27, 2008 Ex Parte Letter at 2-4. The space factor used to allocate costs in the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-16A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-16A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-16A1.txt
  • including permissible ex parte submissions, notices of ex parte presentations, comments, reply comments, and petitions for reconsideration and replies thereto, must be filed in electronic format: (i) Formal complaint proceedings under Section 208 of the Act and rules in §§ 1.720 through 1.736, and pole attachment complaint proceedings under Section 224 of the Act and rules in §§ 1.1401 through 1.1418; (ii) Proceedings, other than rulemaking proceedings, relating to customer proprietary network information (CPNI); (iii) Proceedings relating to cable special relief petitions; (iv) Proceedings involving Over-the-Air Reception Devices; and (v) Common carrier certifications under rule in § 54.314 of this chapter. (2) Unless required under paragraph (f)(1) of this section, in the following types of proceedings, all pleadings, including permissible ex
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-50A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-50A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-50A1.txt
  • stay; and cable operator notice. 1.1404 Complaint. 1.1405 File numbers. 1.1406 Dismissal of complaints. 1.1407 Response and reply. 1.1408 Numbers of copies and form of pleadings. 1.1409 Commission consideration of the complaint. 1.1410 Remedies. 1.1411 Meetings and hearings. 1.1412 Enforcement. 1.1413 Forfeiture. 1.1414 State certification. 1.1415 Other orders. 1.1416 Imputation of rates; modification costs. 1.1417 Allocation of Unusable Space Costs. 1.1418 Use of presumptions in calculating the space factor. 1.1420 Timeline for access to utility poles. 1.1422 Contractors for survey and make-ready. 1.1424 Complaints by incumbent local exchange carriers. * * * Section 1.1401 is revised to read as follows: § 1.1401 Purpose. The rules and regulations contained in subpart J of this part provide complaint and enforcement procedures to ensure
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2003/DA-03-1774A1.html
  • threatened termination of that agreement in the absence of a stay. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION David H. Solomon Chief, Enforcement Bureau _________________________ 1 Petition To Stay Termination Of Pole Attachment Rights, File No. EB-03-MD-005 (filed April 8, 2003) (``Stay Petition'' or ``Petition''). 2 47 C.F.R. 1.1403(d) and 1.1415. 3 Complaint, File No. EB-03-MD-005 (filed April 8, 2003) (``Complaint''). Sections 1.1401 - 1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 1.1401 - 1.1418, provide complaint and enforcement procedures to ensure that telecommunications carriers and cable system operators have non-discriminatory access to utility poles, ducts, conduits, and rights-of-way on rates, terms and conditions that are just and reasonable. See 47 C.F.R. 1.1401. Although the Complaint does not cite to these rules, we will adjudicate the
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2003/DA-03-857A1.html
  • 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.111 and 1.1401-1.1418, that, to the extent that Omnipoint continues to seek access to PECO's facilities, Omnipoint and PECO SHALL NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH maximum just and reasonable rates for pole attachments in accordance with 47 U.S.C. 224 and the Commission's rules. 11. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 0.111 and 1.1401- 1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.111 and 1.1401- 1.1418, that Omnipoint's request for attorney's fees and costs is DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION David H. Solomon Chief, Enforcement Bureau _________________________ 1 47 U.S.C. 224. 2 47 C.F.R. 1.1401-1.1418. 3 Complaint of Omnipoint Corporation, File No. PA 97-002 (filed April 1, 1997) (``Complaint'') at 3. 4 Effective March 25, 2002, the
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2005/DA-05-1583A1.html
  • expenditure of further time and resources of the parties and this Commission. 3. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), and 224 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), and 224, and the authority delegated in sections 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401- 1.1418, that the Motion is GRANTED, and that the Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Lisa B. Griffin Deputy Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division _________________________ 1 Letter from Yaron Dori, Hogan & Hartson, L.L.P., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, File No. EB-05-MDIC-0011 (filed May 20, 2005) (``Motion''). 2 Complaint, File No. EB-04-MD-013 (filed Dec. 3, 2004)
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2006/DA-06-33A1.html
  • expenditure of further time and resources of the parties and this Commission. 3. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), and 224 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), and 224, and the authority delegated in sections 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401- 1.1418, that the Motion is GRANTED, and that the Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Alexander P. Starr Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division _________________________ 1 Joint Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice, File No. EB-05-MD-008 (filed Dec. 21, 2005) (``Motion''). 2 Complaint, File No. EB-05-MD-008 (filed May 23, 2005) (``Complaint''). 3 Complaint at 1-3; 20-32, 38-53; 47 U.S.C. 224. 4
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2006/DA-06-34A1.html
  • expenditure of further time and resources of the parties and this Commission. 3. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), and 224 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), and 224, and the authority delegated in sections 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401- 1.1418, that the Motion is GRANTED, and that the Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Alexander P. Starr Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division _________________________ 1 Joint Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice, File No. EB-04-MD-009 (filed Dec. 21, 2005) (``Motion''). 2 Complaint, File No. EB-04-MD-009 (filed June 29, 2004) (``Complaint''). 3 47 U.S.C. 224(e)(1)-(3). 4 47 U.S.C. 224(d)(1), (2). 5
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2006/DA-06-35A1.html
  • expenditure of further time and resources of the parties and this Commission. 3. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), and 224 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), and 224, and the authority delegated in sections 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401- 1.1418, that the Motion is GRANTED, and that the Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Alexander P. Starr Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division _________________________ 1 Joint Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice, File No. EB-04-MD-004 (filed Dec. 21, 2005) (``Motion''). 2 Complaint, File No. EB-04-MD-004 (filed Mar. 4, 2004) (``Complaint''). 3 47 U.S.C. 224. 4 Complaint at i-ii; 6, 14;
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2008/DA-08-2535A1.html
  • Federal Communications Commission. Please contact J.D. Thomas if you have any questions. Thank you, Grace Kavadoy, SENIOR Paralegal HOGAN & HARTSON LLP Columbia Square, 555 Thirteenth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20004 direct +1.202.637.4863 cell +1.202.321.3212 fax +1.202.637.5910 gmkavadoy@hhlaw.com http://www.hhlaw.com Amended Pole Attachment Access Complaint, File No. EB-08-MD-003 (filed May 12, 2008) ("Complaint"). 47 U.S.C. S: 224. 47 C.F.R. S:S: 1.1404 -1.1418. See Letter from Lisa J. Saks, FCC, to J. D. Thomas, counsel to Fibertech, Shirley S. Fujimoto, counsel to Narragansett, and James Pachulski, counsel to Verizon, File No. EB-08-MD-003 (dated May 27, 2008); Letter from Lia B. Royle, FCC, to J. D. Thomas, Shirley S. Fujimoto, and James Pachulski, File No. EB-08-MD-003 (dated July 3, 2008); Letter from Lisa J.
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2009/DA-09-1312A1.html
  • 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. S:S: 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418, that the Motion is GRANTED, and that this proceeding IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Alexander P. Starr Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division Enforcement Bureau Pole Attachment Access Complaint, File No. EB-09-MD-004 (filed March 13, 2009) ("Complaint"). 47 U.S.C. S: 224. 47 C.F.R. S:S: 1.1401 -1.1418. See Letters from Lia Royle to Maria T. Browne, counsel to Fibertech, Jack E. Strausman, counsel to Pepco, and James Pachulski, counsel to Verizon, File No. EB-09-MD-004 (dated March 24, 2009 and April 14, 2009). Joint Motion to Dismiss Formal Complaint with Prejudice, File No. EB-09-MD-004 (filed May 29, 2009). (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1312
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00116.doc
  • (4) Subject to paragraph (f) the following formula shall apply to pole attachments within a conduit system beginning on February 8, 2001: Maximum Conduit Rate = Conduit Unusable Space Factor + Conduit Usable Space Factor For purposes of this formula, the conduit unusable space factor, as defined under Section 1.1417(c), and the conduit usable space factor, as defined under Section 1.1418(c), shall apply to each linear foot occupied. (f) Paragraphs (e)(2) and (e)(4) of this section shall become effective February 8, 2001 (i.e., five years after the effective date of the Telecommunications Act of 1996). Any increase in the rates for pole attachments that result from the adoption of such regulations shall be phased in over a period of five years
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2003/DA-03-1774A1.html
  • threatened termination of that agreement in the absence of a stay. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION David H. Solomon Chief, Enforcement Bureau _________________________ 1 Petition To Stay Termination Of Pole Attachment Rights, File No. EB-03-MD-005 (filed April 8, 2003) (``Stay Petition'' or ``Petition''). 2 47 C.F.R. 1.1403(d) and 1.1415. 3 Complaint, File No. EB-03-MD-005 (filed April 8, 2003) (``Complaint''). Sections 1.1401 - 1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 1.1401 - 1.1418, provide complaint and enforcement procedures to ensure that telecommunications carriers and cable system operators have non-discriminatory access to utility poles, ducts, conduits, and rights-of-way on rates, terms and conditions that are just and reasonable. See 47 C.F.R. 1.1401. Although the Complaint does not cite to these rules, we will adjudicate the
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2003/DA-03-857A1.html
  • 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.111 and 1.1401-1.1418, that, to the extent that Omnipoint continues to seek access to PECO's facilities, Omnipoint and PECO SHALL NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH maximum just and reasonable rates for pole attachments in accordance with 47 U.S.C. 224 and the Commission's rules. 11. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 0.111 and 1.1401- 1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.111 and 1.1401- 1.1418, that Omnipoint's request for attorney's fees and costs is DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION David H. Solomon Chief, Enforcement Bureau _________________________ 1 47 U.S.C. 224. 2 47 C.F.R. 1.1401-1.1418. 3 Complaint of Omnipoint Corporation, File No. PA 97-002 (filed April 1, 1997) (``Complaint'') at 3. 4 Effective March 25, 2002, the
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2005/DA-05-1583A1.html
  • expenditure of further time and resources of the parties and this Commission. 3. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), and 224 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), and 224, and the authority delegated in sections 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401- 1.1418, that the Motion is GRANTED, and that the Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Lisa B. Griffin Deputy Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division _________________________ 1 Letter from Yaron Dori, Hogan & Hartson, L.L.P., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, File No. EB-05-MDIC-0011 (filed May 20, 2005) (``Motion''). 2 Complaint, File No. EB-04-MD-013 (filed Dec. 3, 2004)
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2006/DA-06-33A1.html
  • expenditure of further time and resources of the parties and this Commission. 3. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), and 224 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), and 224, and the authority delegated in sections 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401- 1.1418, that the Motion is GRANTED, and that the Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Alexander P. Starr Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division _________________________ 1 Joint Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice, File No. EB-05-MD-008 (filed Dec. 21, 2005) (``Motion''). 2 Complaint, File No. EB-05-MD-008 (filed May 23, 2005) (``Complaint''). 3 Complaint at 1-3; 20-32, 38-53; 47 U.S.C. 224. 4
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2006/DA-06-34A1.html
  • expenditure of further time and resources of the parties and this Commission. 3. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), and 224 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), and 224, and the authority delegated in sections 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401- 1.1418, that the Motion is GRANTED, and that the Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Alexander P. Starr Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division _________________________ 1 Joint Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice, File No. EB-04-MD-009 (filed Dec. 21, 2005) (``Motion''). 2 Complaint, File No. EB-04-MD-009 (filed June 29, 2004) (``Complaint''). 3 47 U.S.C. 224(e)(1)-(3). 4 47 U.S.C. 224(d)(1), (2). 5
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2006/DA-06-35A1.html
  • expenditure of further time and resources of the parties and this Commission. 3. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), and 224 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), and 224, and the authority delegated in sections 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.111, 0.311, and 1.1401- 1.1418, that the Motion is GRANTED, and that the Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Alexander P. Starr Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division _________________________ 1 Joint Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice, File No. EB-04-MD-004 (filed Dec. 21, 2005) (``Motion''). 2 Complaint, File No. EB-04-MD-004 (filed Mar. 4, 2004) (``Complaint''). 3 47 U.S.C. 224. 4 Complaint at i-ii; 6, 14;
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2008/DA-08-2535A1.html
  • Federal Communications Commission. Please contact J.D. Thomas if you have any questions. Thank you, Grace Kavadoy, SENIOR Paralegal HOGAN & HARTSON LLP Columbia Square, 555 Thirteenth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20004 direct +1.202.637.4863 cell +1.202.321.3212 fax +1.202.637.5910 gmkavadoy@hhlaw.com http://www.hhlaw.com Amended Pole Attachment Access Complaint, File No. EB-08-MD-003 (filed May 12, 2008) ("Complaint"). 47 U.S.C. S: 224. 47 C.F.R. S:S: 1.1404 -1.1418. See Letter from Lisa J. Saks, FCC, to J. D. Thomas, counsel to Fibertech, Shirley S. Fujimoto, counsel to Narragansett, and James Pachulski, counsel to Verizon, File No. EB-08-MD-003 (dated May 27, 2008); Letter from Lia B. Royle, FCC, to J. D. Thomas, Shirley S. Fujimoto, and James Pachulski, File No. EB-08-MD-003 (dated July 3, 2008); Letter from Lisa J.
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2000/98-6222.doc http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2000/98-6222.html
  • *Honorable Will L. Garwood, Senior U.S. Circuit Judge for the Fifth Circuit, sitting by designation. companies will not accept the rent the providers offer to pay, the Federal Communications Commission (the ``FCC'' or ``Commission'') sets the rent. In In re Implementation of Section 703(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 13 F.C.C.R. 6777 (1998) (codified at 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1401 -1.1418 (1999)) (``Report and Order''), the FCC promulgated a formula for computing that rent. The FCC also ruled (in the Report and Order) that the 1996 Act precluded utilities (power and telephone) from receiving rent for wires that were ``overlashed'' to wires previously attached to their poles; that the 1996 Act gave it authority to regulate the placement of wireless communications
• http://www.fcc.gov/transaction/nextel-motorola/southernreply010901.pdf
  • to roam is not satisfied wilh the cwLr;omc of those negotiations, it may file a complaint containing a complete statement of the 47 rid 4R 49 In the Mutter qf Impkmentation of the Locul Competition Provisions in t/w Telecommunicutions Act of 1996, CC Docket No. 96-98, First 12epo-t and Order, 11 FCC Red. 15499,15994-95,FCC 96-325, fl1002(1996). 47 c!.P-R $0 1.1401 -1.1418 (1999). 22 comment of soutbem LMC January 5,2001 facts in support of-its claim, along-with any supporting affidavits or other dwumention. Within 30 days, the carrier againsl whonr the complaint was filed must file a response cuntain& a complete statcmetlt of the facts in support of its defense, dong with any supporting affidavits or other docwnentation. The complainant will then have