Petitioner Doesn't Have Standing To Challenge 800 MHz Rebanding Order, FCC Tells Court
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit should reject one of the few remaining challenges to the FCC's 800 MHz rebanding order, approved in 2004, on the grounds that petitioner James Kay does not have standing to bring…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
the action, the FCC said in a brief filed with the court. Kay held two 800 MHz licenses, revoked by the FCC in 2002, in a decision upheld by the D.C. Circuit three years later, the agency said. Kay’s only other connection is that he claims to be the sole owner of Third District Enterprises, which holds licenses in Southern California that must still be relocated, the FCC said. Kay “holds no 800 MHz licenses himself, and while he claims to be the indirect but controlling shareholder of Third District, the shareholder standing rule requires him to show an injury to himself separate from any injury to his company,” the agency said. “He has not even attempted to do so. The case should therefore be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.” Even if Kay were granted standing he has not met the “high burden” of showing the 800 MHz rebanding order was “unsupported by substantial evidence, much less that he is entitled to the drastic relief of unwinding the nearly complete effort of reconfiguration, which has lasted over 10 years and already cost over $1.8 billion,” the FCC said.