United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
____________
No. 12-1258 September Term, 2012
FCC-12-52
Filed On: December 6, 2012
Accipiter Communications, Inc.,
Petitioner
v.
Federal Communications Commission and
United States of America,
Respondents
BEFORE: Garland, Brown, and Kavanaugh, Circuit Judges
O R D E R
Upon consideration of the motion to dismiss and to defer filing of the
administrative record, the response thereto, and the reply; and the motion to strike, or in
the alternative for leave to file a surreply, the response thereto, and the reply, it is
ORDERED that the motion to dismiss be granted.  An intent to challenge the
underlying Transformation Order cannot be fairly inferred from the petition for review
and the contemporaneous filings.  Entravision Holdings, LLC v. FCC, 202 F.3d 311, 313
(D.C. Cir. 2000).  To the extent the petitioner seeks review of the order denying in part
reconsideration, it is well-established that denials of petitions for reconsideration are
unreviewable except insofar as the request for reconsideration is based upon new
evidence or changed circumstances.  See id.  Petitioner has not shown that the portion
of its petition for reconsideration that was denied was based on new evidence or
changed circumstances.  It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to strike and the motion to defer filing of
the administrative record be dismissed as moot.
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.  The Clerk
is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution
of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc.  See Fed. R. App.
P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.
Per Curiam
USCA Case #12-1258      Document #1408664            Filed: 12/06/2012      Page 1 of 1