In re Core Communications, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
531 F.3d 849 · 2008
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 8 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably Heartland Regional Medical Center v. Sebelius (2009), Garcia v. Vilsack (2009)
18 federal appellate · 8 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1651 · 47 U.S.C. § 160 · 47 U.S.C. § 201 · 47 U.S.C. § 251 · 47 U.S.C. § 402 · 5 U.S.C. § 706
Relies on Allied Chemical Corporation v. Daiflon Inc · Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. · Telecommunications Research & Action Center v. Federal Communications Commission · Allied-Signal, Inc. v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission · Rodway v. United States Department of Agriculture
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the time agencies take to make decisions must be governed by a rule of reason; (2) where Congress has provided a timetable or other indication of the speed with which it expects the agency to proceed in the enabling statute, that statutory scheme may supply content for this rule of reason; (3) delays that might be reasonable in the sphere of economic regulation are less tolerable when human health and welfare are at stake; (4) the court should consider the effect of expediting delayed action on agency activities of a higher or competing priority; (5) the court should also take into account the nature and extent of the interests prejudiced by delay; and (6) the court need not find any impropriety lurking behind agency lassitude in order to hold that agency action is unreasonably delayed.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[U]nder the dial-up method, a consumer uses a line provided by a local exchange carrier (LEC) — usually an incumbent local exchange carrier (ILEC) — to dial the local telephone number of an Internet service provider (ISP), which then connects the call to the Internet. Typically, the ISP does not subscribe to the ILEC, but instead subscribes to another LEC — a competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC) — that interconnects with the incumbent. Accordingly, a customer who dials up to the Internet usually obligates and originating ILEC to transfer the call to a CLEC, which then delivers the call to the ISP.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the Chairman’s doing “everything he can” may not suffice, as he may not be able to enforce his will on his fellow Commissioners. In any event, the representation is not enforceable unless backed up by issuance of [an order]. At some point, promises' are no longer enough, and we must end the game of administrative keep-away.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.