The PEOPLE OF the STATE OF CALIFORNIA; Public Utilities Commission of the State of California; Petitioners,
Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission ("PAPUC"); Southern California Coalition on Battered Women; Toward Utility Rate Normalization ("TURN"); Consumer Federation of America; Consumer Action; The National Association of Social Workers ("NASW"); The California Alliance Against Domestic Violence; The Family Violence Prevention Fund; Petitioners-Intervenors,
v.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of America; Respondents,
US West Communications; MCI Telecommunications Corporation; Ad hoc Telecommunications Users Committee ("Committee"); AT & T Corporation; The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners; National Association of Consumer Advocates (NASUCA), Ameritech Operating Companies; Southwestern Bell Telephone Company; Pacific Bell; United States Telephone Association (USTA); BellSouth Corporation; Respondents-Intervenors.
The PEOPLE OF the STATE OF CALIFORNIA; Public Utilities Commission of the State of California; Petitioners,
Consumer Federation of America; Southern California Coalition on Battered Women; National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners ("NARUC"); Toward Utility Rate Normalization ("TURN"); California Alliance Against Domestic Violence; The Family Violence Prevention Fund ("Fund"); Consumer Action; National Association of Social Workers ("NASW") and The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission ("PAPUC"); Petitioners-Intervenors,
v.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of America; Respondents,
BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. ("BellSouth"); Southwestern Bell Telephone Company; National Telephone Cooperative Association; GTE California Incorporated (hereinafter "GTEC"); MCI Telecommunications Corporation; The United States Telephone Association ("USTA"); US West Communications; Ad hoc Telecommunications Users Committee; Respondents-Intervenors.
AT & T CORPORATION, Petitioners,
MCI Telecommunications Corporation; Consumer Federation of America; Consumer Action; National Association of Social Workers; California Alliance Against Domestic Violence; The Family Violence Prevention Fund; Southern California Coalition of Battered Women; Petitioners-Intervenors,
v.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of America; Respondents,
Southwestern Bell Telephone Company ("Southwestern Bell"); National Telephone Cooperative Association; Bell Atlantic Telephone Companies ("Bell Atlantic"); Ameritech; GTE Service Corporation ("GTE"); Respondents-Intervenors.
COMPETITIVE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION; Petitioner,
Consumer Federation of America, California Alliance Against Domestic Violence & The Family Violence Prevention Fund; Petitioners-Intervenors,
v.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of America; Respondents.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued and Submitted November 16, 1995.
Decided January 31, 1996.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Mark Fogelman, Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, San Francisco, California; David W. Carpenter, Sidley & Austin, Chicago, Illinois; Robert J. Aamoth, Reed Smith Shaw & McClay, Washington, D.C. (on the briefs), for petitioners.
John P. Stern, William E. Kennard, General Counsel, Daniel M. Armstrong, Associate General Counsel, John E. Ingle, Deputy Associate General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C., for respondents.
Thomas J. Long, Toward Utility Rate Normalization, San Francisco, California; Gus T. May, Center for Law in the Public Interest, Los Angeles, California; Roberta M. Ikemi, California Women's Law Center, Los Angeles, California; William Gwire, San Francisco, California; James Bradford Ramsay, National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, Washington, D.C.; Carolyn L. Polowy, National Association of Social Workers, Washington, D.C.; Maureen A. Scott, Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, (on the briefs), for petitioners-intervenors.
John Gibson Mullan, Kirkland & Ellis, Washington, D.C.; Michael R. Doyen (on the briefs), Munger, Tolles & Olson, Los Angeles, California, for respondents-intervenors.
Petitions to Review Orders of the Federal Communications Commission.
Before: SCHREODER and ALARCON, Circuit Judges, and WHALEY, District Judge.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
ALARCON, Circuit Judge:
California's Public Utilities Commission ("CPUC") has filed two petitions seeking review of the Federal Communications Commission's ("FCC") decision denying reconsideration of the FCC's rule that subscribers who fail to choose the method to prevent disclosure of their nonpublished1 telephone numbers, when Caller ID service becomes effective, must be served with a system that requires the customer to dial *67 each...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
