Case Name: FLORIDA DIGITAL NETWORK, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EMBARQ FLORIDA, INC., a Florida corporation, Florida Public Service Commission, Lila A. Jaber, in her official capacity as Chairman of the Florida Public Service Commission, J. Terry Deason, Braulio L. Baez, et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-09-15
Citations: 195 F. App'x 944
Docket Number: No. 05-16653
Parties: FLORIDA DIGITAL NETWORK, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EMBARQ FLORIDA, INC., a Florida corporation, Florida Public Service Commission, Lila A. Jaber, in her official capacity as Chairman of the Florida Public Service Commission, J. Terry Deason, Braulio L. Baez, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before MARCUS, WILSON and COX, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 195
Pages: 944–944

Head Matter:
FLORIDA DIGITAL NETWORK, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EMBARQ FLORIDA, INC., a Florida corporation, Florida Public Service Commission, Lila A. Jaber, in her official capacity as Chairman of the Florida Public Service Commission, J. Terry Deason, Braulio L. Baez, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 05-16653.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
Sept. 15, 2006.
Michael C. Sloan, Cole, Raywid & Braverman, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
J. Jeffry Wahlen, Ausley & McMullen, David E. Smith, Richard Charles Beliak, Florida Public Service Commission, Tallahassee, FL, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before MARCUS, WILSON and COX, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Florida Digital Network, Inc. ("Florida Digital") appeals the district court's affirmance of a decision by the Florida Public Service Commission ("the Commission") setting the rates charged by an incumbent local exchange carrier (Embarq Florida, Inc., formerly Sprint-Florida, Inc.) for unbundled network elements provided to competitive carriers, including Florida Digital, under the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Florida Digital contends: (1) that the rates established were arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, and not supported by substantial, competent evidence; (2) that the Commission decision establishing the rates failed to comply with applicable law and regulations; and (3) that the Commission arbitrarily established geographically de-averaged rate zones.
After reviewing the record, reading the parties's briefs and having the benefit of oral argument, we affirm the district court's decision based on its well-reasoned order of November 2, 2005.
AFFIRMED.