Nelson Broadcasting Corporation v. Federal Communications Commission, Evergreen Media Corporation, Intervenors

923 F.2d 201
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedNovember 23, 1990
Docket90-1143
StatusUnpublished

This text of 923 F.2d 201 (Nelson Broadcasting Corporation v. Federal Communications Commission, Evergreen Media Corporation, Intervenors) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Nelson Broadcasting Corporation v. Federal Communications Commission, Evergreen Media Corporation, Intervenors, 923 F.2d 201 (D.C. Cir. 1990).

Opinion

923 F.2d 201

287 U.S.App.D.C. 378

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: D.C. Circuit Local Rule 11(c) states that unpublished orders, judgments, and explanatory memoranda may not be cited as precedents, but counsel may refer to unpublished dispositions when the binding or preclusive effect of the disposition, rather than its quality as precedent, is relevant.
NELSON BROADCASTING CORPORATION, Appellant,
v.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Appellee,
Evergreen Media Corporation, et al., Intervenors.

No. 90-1143.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Nov. 23, 1990.

Before HARRY T. EDWARDS, RUTH BADER GINSBURG and HENDERSON, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the motion to dismiss, and the opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion be granted upon the Federal Communications Commission's assurance that it "considers itself bound by the terms of [this court's March 19, 1990] order," Motion to Dismiss at 1 n. 1, and that it thus will take no action regarding appellant's booster transmitter pending full Commission review of its staff's decision. The Commission's procedures have not yet run their course. See Washington Ass'n for Television & Children v. FCC, 712 F.2d 677, 680-81 (D.C.Cir.1983); Spanish Int'l Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 385 F.2d 615, 625 (D.C.Cir.1967). Furthermore, Nelson's arguments do not justify waiving the requirement that it exhaust its administrative remedies prior to seeking judicial review. See Randolph-Sheppard Vendors of America v. Weinberger, 795 F.2d 90, 107-08 (D.C.Cir.1986).

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C.Cir.Rule 15.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
923 F.2d 201, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nelson-broadcasting-corporation-v-federal-communic-cadc-1990.