Saluting JohnG
and "common law", lots of mutually conflicting paragraphs,
never cleaned up due to lack of consensus and perpetual
bickering.
(what was this other thing in the middle of the road
besides yellow lines??)
---
Nextwave
NextWave Case - Part I - Appeals Court Panel Seems Sympathetic To NextWave’s Case on License
Cancellation The fate of NextWave Telecom, Inc., now rests in the hands of a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court
of Appeals in Washington. Those judges last week indicated they were sympathetic to the bankrupt carrier’s
contention that the FCC reclaimed its “C” and “F” block PCS (personal communications service) licenses in
violation of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. But their decision may come down to whether they agree with the FCC’s
contention that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (New York) already has rejected most of
NextWave’s arguments. Even if the D.C. Circuit decides it has jurisdiction in the case, it should rule in the FCC’s
favor because the agency did not violate bankruptcy law, the Commission’s attorney said last week during an oral
argument before the panel. The Commission also disputed NextWave’s charges that the agency had violated
principles of due process and fair notice in c - by: pay_the_vig
NextWave Case - Part II - For example, section 525 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code prohibits a federal agency from
revoking the license of a bankrupt company that has failed to pay a “dischargeable” debt. Judge Tatel called the
language in section 525 “pretty plain,” and Judge Sentelle called the provision “absolute.” Mr. Armstrong
suggested that NextWave’s debt was not dischargeable in the context of the FCC’s licensing scheme. Considering
section 525 along with section 362 would lead one to the conclusion that section 525 doesn’t bar the FCC from
canceling NextWave’s licenses, he said. The Second Circuit, he noted, reached such a conclusion. But the judges
seemed skeptical of Mr. Armstrong’s arguments and said NextWave’s debts appeared dischargeable. “There’s no
regulatory exception for section 525,” Judge Tatel said. Another section, 362, spells out the stay provisions of
bankruptcy law. It prohibits the collection of any lien against a bankrupt debtor. Judge Tatel questioned whether a
footnote in one of the - by: pay_the_vig
----
Hey, it ended just when getting even more intersting,
secrete footnotes??
Ilmarinen. |
