VERIZON CALIFORNIA, INC. v. F.C.C.

No. 08-1234.

555 F.3d 270 (2009)

VERIZON CALIFORNIA, INC., et al., Petitioners v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION and United States of America, Respondents Qwest Communications International Inc., et al., Intervenors.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Decided February 10, 2009.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Michael K. Kellogg argued the cause for petitioners. On the briefs were Aaron M. Panner, Andrew G. McBride, William P. Barr, Michael E. Glover, and Karen Zacharia.

Bennett L. Ross, Joshua S. Turner, Thomas R. McCarthy, Joshua H. Seidermann, and Robert B. McKenna Jr. were on the briefs for intervenors United States Telecom Association and Independent Telephone & Telecommunications Alliance. Craig E. Gilmore, Lawrence C. Keller, and Lewis A. Tollin entered appearances.

James M. Carr, Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Thomas O. Barnett, Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Catherine G. O'Sullivan and Nancy C. Garrison, Attorneys, Matthew B. Berry, General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, Joseph R. Palmore, Deputy General Counsel, and Richard K. Welch, Acting Deputy Associate General Counsel. Joel Marcus, Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, entered an appearance.

Donald B. Verrilli Jr. argued the cause for intervenors Comcast Corporation, et al. With him on the brief were Mark D. Schneider, Christopher W. Savage, Matthew A. Brill, J. Scott Ballenger, Brian W. Murray, and Lori Alvino McGill.

Daniel L. Brenner, Neal M. Goldberg, and Michael S. Schooler were on the brief for amicus curiae National Cable & Telecommunications Association in support of respondents.

Gene Kimmelman and Chris Murray were on the brief for amicus curiae Consumers Union in support of respondents.

Opinion for the Court filed by Senior Circuit Judge WILLIAMS.


WILLIAMS, Senior Circuit Judge.

When a telephone service provider loses a phone customer, the customer is entitled to "port" the existing phone number to the new service provider. The latter initiates a Local Service Request ("LSR"), which spurs the original provider into the necessary technical action. The LSR also, of course, alerts the outgoing provider to its imminent loss of a customer, and providers may naturally be tempted to seize the chance to make a last...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

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.

Citing Cases