No. 11-1146.

708 F.3d 183 (2013)

AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER SERVICE CORPORATION, et al., Petitioners. v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION and United States of America, Respondents. Consumers Energy Company, et al., Intervenors.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Decided February 26, 2013.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Eric B. Langley argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs were J. Russ Campbell , Jason B. Tompkins , and Sean B. Cunningham .

John B. Richards and Thomas B. Magee were on the brief for intervenors Consumers Energy Company, et al. in support of petitioners.

Edward H. Comer , Aryeh B. Fishman , Shirley S. Fujimoto , Jeffrey L. Sheldon , and Kevin M. Cookler were on the brief for amicus curiae Edison Electric Institute in support of petitioners.

C. Grey Pash Jr. , Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, argued the cause for respondents. On the brief were Robert B. Nicholson and Kristen C. Limarzi , Attorneys, U.S. Department of Justice, and Austin C. Schlick , General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, Peter Karanjia , Deputy General Counsel, and Richard K. Welch , Deputy Associate General Counsel. Laurel R. Bergold , Attorney, Federal Communications Commission, entered an appearance.

Helgi C. Walker argued the cause for intervenors United States Telecom Association, et al. With her on the brief were Bennett L. Ross , Brendan T. Carr , John E. Benedict , William A. Brown , Gary L. Phillips , Michael E. Glover , Edward Shakin , and Katharine R. Saunders .

Jonathan E. Nuechterlein argued the cause for intervenors Comcast Corporation, et al. With him on the brief were Kelly P. Dunbar , Rick Chessen , Neal M. Goldberg , Lynn R. Charytan , T. Scott Thompson , Michael T.N. Fitch , Craig Gilmore , Alan G. Fishel , Jeffrey E. Rummel , Adam D. Bowser , David P. Murray , Thomas Jones , Gardner Gillespie , Wesley R. Heppler, Paul Glist , Daniel L. Brenner , Michael F. Altschul , Brian M. Josef , Jonathan D. Hacker , Loren L. AliKhan , and John D. Seiver.   Christopher A. Fedeli , Paul A. Werner III , Christopher M. Heimann , and Heather M. Zachary entered appearances.

Before: TATEL, Circuit Judge, and WILLIAMS and SENTELLE, Senior Circuit Judges.

WILLIAMS, Senior Circuit Judge:

Section 224 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. § 224, provides a variety of advantages to certain types of firms seeking to attach their wires, cable, or other network equipment to utility poles. The Federal Communications Commission, which is charged with applying § 224, in 2011 made three revisions to its interpretation of the statute. In the Matter of Implementation of Section 224 of the Act, Report and...


Uncompromising quality. Enduring impact.
Your support ensures a bright future for independent legal reporting.

As you are aware we have offered this as a free subscription over the past years and we have now made it a paid service.Look forward to your continued patronage.



Read it with your Leagle account.
Sign in to continue

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