WHITAKER ET AL.

v.

THOMPSON, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Talk Am., Inc. v. Mich. Bell Tel. Co., 564 U.S. 50 (U.S. 2011)
  …t entrance facilities are not network elements under § 251(c)(3), but found the agency rulemaking record insufficient and remanded to the Commission for further consideration. See United States Telecom Assn. v. FCC, 359 F. 3d 554, 586, cert, denied, 543 U. S. 925 (2004). The court noted that if entrance facilities were in fact “ ‘network elements,’ ” then “an analysis of impairment would presumably follow.” 359 F. 3d, at 586. In 2005, the Commission responded. See Triennial Review Remand Order ¶ ¶ 136-141.…
• United States v. Livdahl, 459 F. Supp. 2d 1255 (S.D. Fla. 2005)
• THE Pittsburg & Midway Coal Mining Co. v. Dir., Off. of Workers' Comp. Programs, United States Dep't of Labor, 508 F.3d 975 (11th Cir. 2007)
  …we observe that the Solicitor General has previously expressed some of the same concerns about the Fourth Circuit's interpretation of § 411(c)(3). See Brief for the Federal Respondent in Opposition at 7-8, Gollie v. Elkay Mining Co., cert. denied, 543 U.S. 925, 125 S.Ct. 344, 160 L.Ed.2d 224 (2004) (No. 04-39). For all of these reasons, we conclude that § 411(c)(3)(B) and § 718.304(b) do not require that an equivalency determination be made between autopsy findings and x-rays. Those provisions focus on…