SPRINT v. TELEPHONY PCS v. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals today released an amended order in SPRINT v. TELEPHONY PCS v. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, No. 05-56076, a federal appeal. The panel consisted of Myron H. Bright, A. Wallace Tashima, and Carlos T. Bea, Circuit Judges.
BRIGHT, Circuit Judge:
Sprint Telephony PCS sought an injunction in the district court to prevent San Diego County (”the County”) from enforcing its Wireless Telecommunications Facilities zoning ordinance (”WTO”). The district court granted a permanent injunction, agreeing with Sprint that the WTO’s regulation of wireless facility placement violated § 253(a) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996) (codified as amended in scattered sections of U.S.C. Titles 15, 18, & 47) (”TCA”). But, the court held that § 253(a) did not create a private right of action and thus denied Sprint’s 28 U.S.C. § 1983 claim for money damages and attorney’s fees. See Sprint Telephony PCS, L.P. v. County of . . .
The unopposed motion of the National League of Cities and eight other organizations for leave to file an Amici Curiae . . .