United States Telecom Association v. FCC (2004)
.svg){kind=small} | This United States government–related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
| USTA v. FCC | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit |
| Full case name | United States Telecom Assocation v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America |
| Decided | March 2, 2004 |
| Citation | 359 F.3d 554, 561-62 |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Harry T. Edwards, A. Raymond Randolph, Senior Circuit Judge Stephen F. Williams |
| Keywords | |
| USTA FCC RBOCs ILEC CLEC | |
USTA v. FCC is the 2004 court case in which the Washington, D.C., Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the Federal Communication Commission's Triennial Review Order (TRO).The court's decision is based on the Telecommunications Act of 1996 section 251 which defines unbundled network elements (UNEs) for incumbent local exchange carriers and competitive local exchange carriers.[1]
Following the Court of Appeals' decision the FCC requested that the case be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. In June 2004 the solicitor general announced that a request for the Supreme Court to review the case would not be made. As a result of the solicitor general's decision the FCC would issue its Triennial Review Remand Order (TRRO) creating new rules and regulations for unbundled network elements.[2]
History
Triennial Review Remand Order (TRRO)
In December 2004, following the court's decision in USTA II, the FCC created the Triennial Review Remand Order in. The order updated the original Triennial Review Order by adopting new regulations for ILECS with regards to network unbundling.[2]
In 2006 the D.C. Circuit rejected claims in Covad Communications company et al. v. FCC, affirming the unbundling determinations made by the FCC. As a result of the challenges to the TRRO the D.C. Circuit court determined that CLECs would need to demonstrate the need for UNEs in any future cases involving the Telecommunications Act of 1996 section 251.[3]
Ruling
Implications
References
- ^ United States Telecom Association, et al. v. FCC & USA (D.C. Cir. 2004)
- ^ a b "§ 251 Network Unbundling". Federal Communications Commission. Retrieved 2 February 2011. Cite error: The named reference "section251" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
- ^ Drye, Keley (19 June 2006). "D.C. Circuit Affirms Triennial Review Remand Order". Telecommunications Practice Group.
{{cite journal}}:|access-date=requires|url=(help); Unknown parameter|coauthors=ignored (|author=suggested) (help); Unknown parameter|month=ignored (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link)