CTIA—Wireless Ass'n v. Federal Communications Commission

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that agency had reconsidered policy in part because its order reaffirming its interpretation “indisputably offer[ed] two new justifications not found in [prior orders]”
• holding that the plaintiff could assert an argument raised by third parties’ comments to the defendant agency
• holding that the plaintiff could assert an argument raised by third parties' comments to the defendant agency
• concluding that plaintiff’s challenge to an agency order was reviewable under the reopening doctrine because, inter alia, “the NPA Order indisputably offer[ed] two new justifications not found in the 1990 Order or 1995 Order” (emphases omitted)
• finding that, if the court must defer to the agency’s interpretation, it is not arbitrary and capricious for another agency to do so
• reaching the opposite conclusion because, among other things, the final order in question offered “two new justifications” that “constituted the [agency’s] first legal rationales for its action to date”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).