Case Name: UNITED STATES TELECOM ASSOCIATION, Petitioner v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION and United States of America, Respondents. Independent Telephone & Telecommunications Alliance, et al., Intervenors
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-05-01
Citations: 855 F.3d 381
Docket Number: No. 15-1063 Consolidated with 15-1078, 15-1086, 15-1090, 15-1091, 15-1092, 15-1095, 15-1099, 15-1117, 15-1128, 15-1151, 15-1164
Parties: UNITED STATES TELECOM ASSOCIATION, Petitioner v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION and United States of America, Respondents Independent Telephone & Telecommunications Alliance, et al., Intervenors
Judges: Before: GARLAND , Chief Judge; HENDERSON , ROGERS, TATEL , BROWN , GRIFFITH, KAVANAUGH , SRINIVASAN , MILLETT, PILLARD , and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 855
Pages: 381–435

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES TELECOM ASSOCIATION, Petitioner v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION and United States of America, Respondents Independent Telephone & Telecommunications Alliance, et al., Intervenors
No. 15-1063 Consolidated with 15-1078, 15-1086, 15-1090, 15-1091, 15-1092, 15-1095, 15-1099, 15-1117, 15-1128, 15-1151, 15-1164
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Filed: May 1, 2017
Before: GARLAND , Chief Judge; HENDERSON , ROGERS, TATEL , BROWN , GRIFFITH, KAVANAUGH , SRINIVASAN , MILLETT, PILLARD , and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.
Chief Judge Garland and Circuit Judges Henderson and Pillard did not participate in this matter.
A statement by Circuit Judge Srinivasan, joined by Circuit Judge Tatel, concurring in the denial of the petitions, is attached.
Circuit Judges Brown and Kavanaugh would grant the petitions. Separate statements by Circuit Judge Brown and Circuit Judge Kavanaugh, dissenting from the denial of the petitions, are attached.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM
The petitions for rehearing en banc, the responses thereto, and the brief of amici curiae were circulated to the full court, and a vote was requested. Thereafter, a majority of the judges eligible to vote did not vote in favor of the petitions. Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that the petitions be denied.