Johnson v. FCC.

• Author: Attar, Arian
• Position: Radio license expiration

JOHNSON V. FCC

No. 14-1250 (D.C. Cir. 2015)

In Johnson v. FCC, (1) the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dismissed an appeal of the FCC's dismissal of an objection to a radio licensing assignment. (2) This case was originally handled by the FCC's Media Bureau, Audio Division. (3)

1. BACKGROUND

   In December 2010, petitioner William Johnson sought a determination by the FCC that the FM Translator Station W227AV's license had expired according to Section 312(g) of the Communications Act. (4) One motive for seeking an FCC determination on license expiration is to show the license is not being used, so the petitioner can then have the license assigned to them and take advantage of its benefits. In May 2013, the FCC granted an application to reassign W227AV from Reach Communications, Inc. to Suncoast Radio, Inc., and the application went unopposed. (5)

   Despite previously having the opportunity to object to the assignment through public comment, Johnson filed an assignment petition, where he objected to the assignment of W227AV from Reach Communications, Inc. to Suncoast Radio, Inc. (6) Johnson argued the assignment should be rescinded because the license had expired and therefore could not be assigned. (7) In August 2013, the FCC denied Johnson's 2010 petition as lacking merit and dismissed the assignment petition because it was not timely filed. (8) In September 2013, Johnson filed a petition for review of the FCC's August 2013 decision, but this petition was again dismissed as untimely in April 2014. (9) Johnson then challenged the April 2014 dismissal by filing another petition for review, but the FCC dismissed the application for review in September 2014 because it was untimely. (10) In November 2014, Johnson petitioned the D.C. Circuit for review of the FCC's September 2014 decision. (11)

2. ANALYSIS

   The main issue in Johnson was whether the D.C. Circuit had jurisdiction to rule upon the merits of a petitioner's complaint in a situation where the petitioner did not timely file an appeal. (12) Pursuant to Section 402(c) of the Communications Act, the petitioner had 30 days to file his petition. (13) In this case, the petitioner missed the deadline by nearly one month. (14) The D.C. Circuit agreed with the FCC that the petitioner "failed to file his appeal within [the appropriate time], and it therefore must be dismissed."...