Directv, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, MCI Telecommunications Corporation, Intervenors

How courts have described this case

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

• \[S]tanding ... may be established by reference ... to lost profits....\
• stating regulations that merely “upset[] expectations based on prior law” are not retroactive
• “The [agency] is entitled to consider and revise its views ... if it gives a reasoned explanation for the revision” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)
• DIRECTV had standing to challenge rule requiring it to divest certain holdings upon winning an auction because rule was an allegedly “unlawful barrier” to its participation in the auction
• DIRECTV had standing to challenge rule requiring it to divest certain holdings upon winning an auction because rule was an allegedly “unlawful barrier” to its participation in the auction
• DIRECTV had standing to challenge rule requiring it to divest certain holdings upon winning an auction because rule was an allegedly “unlawful barrier” to its participation in the auction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).