WPC? 2BVXZ3|I (TT)7PC2XBXP\  P6QXP"5^2BQdd$BBdq2B28dddddddddd88qqqYzoBNzoozzB8B^dBYdYdYBdd88d8ddddBN8ddddY`(`l2BBBBPBddYYYYYYzYzYzYzYB8B8B8B8ddddddddddYdddddoddYYYYzYzYzYdddddPdBdBBBdNdoNNF2ZdBYddddd7>d<d<BBYYdBBddBYBdYzzzzBBBBqodYYYYYYYYYYY8888dddddddndddddddHP LaserJet 5Si/5Si MXHPLA5SMX.WRSXj\  P6G;,,,%kXP2 *4D Z43|I "5^2BQdd$BBdq2B28dddddddddd88qqqYzoBNzoozzB8B^dBYdYdYBdd88d8ddddBN8ddddY`(`l2BBBBPBddYYYYYYzYzYzYzYB8B8B8B8ddddddddddYdddddoddYYYYzYzYzYdddddPdBdBBBdNdoNNF2ZdBYddddd7>d<d<BBYYdBBddBYBdYzzzzBBBBqodYYYYYYYYYYY8888dddddddndddddddHP LaserJet 5Si/5Si MXHPLA5SMX.WRSXj\  P6G;,,,%kXP2 Rvpo Times New Roman (TT)Times New Roman (Bold) (TT)Times New Roman (Italic) (TT) S- I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#&I\  P6Q &P#a8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . 2 k k|  v a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` 2t4  B  BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  2  j a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# 2Qa7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technicala1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  2 ?a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   2a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . 2 3eZ Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:%7777777777>>>1eOIIOC=OO%+OCbOO=OI=COOhOOC%%47%17171%777U7777%+77O77155;%%%%,%77O1O1O1O1O1bII1C1C1C1C1%%%%O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O1O7O7O7O7O7=7O7O1O1I1I1C1C1C1O7O7O7O7O7,7%7%%%7+O7bO=+N&27%177777"RR7!SS7R!%%117n%%77ln%1n%!N%<<>,?>77?%-77[U%%7>%7777777777>>>1eOIIOC=OO%+OCbOO=OI=COOhOOC%%47%17171%777U7777%+77O77155;N%71n77%n=%b%%11&7n%l+%OO%77777%S7>%S7,OOOOOO=7111111I111117777777<77777772W6*-w0g3"5^(1<d<d<BBoodBBddBoBddzzzzzzzzzzBBBBozdddddddYYYYY8888dddddddndddddYd2?\69 <R7PC2XXP\  P6QXP2I=.X &I\  P6Q&P.2N=.X&N4  pQ&P,%XJ,\  P6QJPW!0(Xh0\  P6QhPy.C8*X/C\  P6QP {,C8*X3VC*f9 xQX 5PC2X3f_XP*f9 xQXX$0J=.X3L&J*f9 xQ&X.y.G8*X<G4  pQ"5^.=M\\'==\|.=.3\\\\\\\\\\==|||\ppzpp=Qzfzpp\fppffG3GM\=\\Q\Q3\\33Q3\\\\GG3\QzQQGI2Ic.====I=\\p\p\p\p\p\zzQpQpQpQpQ=3=3=3=3z\\\\\\\\\fQp\\\\fQ\p\p\p\p\zQzQpQpQpQ\\\\\I\=\===\Q\z\GN@.`\G\\\\\\39\7\7==ff\==\\=f=7N=dd|Ii|\\i.=M\\'==\|.=.3\\\\\\\\\\==|||\ppzpp=Qzfzpp\fppffG3GM\=\\Q\Q3\\33Q3\\\\GG3\QzQQGI2Ic=\f\\=\===ff@\=G=zf.G\\\\2\=3\|=\Id77=i`.=79\\ppppppzpppp====z|fp\\\\\\\zQQQQQ3333\\\\\\\d\\\\\Q\"5^*7]SS.77S_*7*.SSSSSSSSSS77___SxoxxofASoxfx]oxxxxo7.7aS7S]J]J7S].7].]S]]JA7]SxSSJB%BV*7777C7S]xSxSxSxSxSxxJoJoJoJoJA.A.A.A.x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxJxJoJoJoJSSS]]C]A]A7A]SSx]AN:*ZS7SSSSSS27}}S2||S}277SSS77SS7S72N7[[_C`_SS`*7]SS.77S_*7*.SSSSSSSSSS77___SxoxxofASoxfx]oxxxxo7.7aS7S]J]J7S].7].]S]]JA7]SxSSJB%BVv7SSSS7]777SS:S7A7xx*7SSSS%S7|2S_7|SC[227`Z*727S}}}SxxxxxxxooooAAAAxx_xxxxxf]SSSSSSxJJJJJ....S]SSSSS[S]]]]S]2? S' X   )d  S' #&I\  P6Q &P#Federal Communications Commission`(#kDA 98336 ă   yxJdddy )`Qb Before the Federal Communications Commission  S'&2Washington, D.C. 20554 ă In re Application of#&I\  P6Q &P#) )  S'Colorado RSA 7B(2) Limited)ppFile No. 01131CLP296  S'Partnership)pp )  S5'Phase II Unserved Area Application)pp for Market Nos. 354(B), Colorado 7 ) Saguache RSA, and 356(B) Colorado 9 )  S 'Costilla RSA)pp    S 'm ORDER \  S7'X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8: X#4ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#Motion at 2.d Section 22.942  xprohibits any person from having a direct or indirect ownership interest in licensees for both channel  S' xblocks in overlapping CGSAs, unless such interests pose no substantial threat to competition.n Xa&4ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#47 C.F.R.  22.942.n Thus, it",''"  xapplies where one entity has ownership interests in both channel blocks (i.e. ownership interests in both  xDthe A and B Blocks) in the same market. 7B(2) Partnership correctly argues that section 22.942 does not  S' xapply. X4ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#Motion at 3.#Xj\  P6G;XP#ё Here, all of the ownership interests in question involve licenses in the B Block. Colorado 7  Sg' x Partnership's license for Cellular Radiotelephone Service Station KNKN288,gy X4ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#Petition at 2.#Xj\  P6G;XP#э and 7B(2) Partnership's  xproposed Application for a license for a new station at RSA 354B(2), Colorado 7Sagua $%Ig che RSA, at  S' x@Antonito, Colorado, are both in the B Block.* X 4ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#See 7B(2) Partnership's Phase II Application.#Xj\  P6G;XP#Ѳ Accordingly, no ownership interests in the A Block are  ximplicated. Therefore, because Colorado 7 Partnership's license and the Application's proposed license are located in the same block (Block B), section 22.942 of the Commission's rules does not apply.  "8. Although not citing section 22.912 of the Commission's rules, Petitioner does argue that there  xis a prohibited overlap. Specifically, Petitioner argues that it would be aggrieved and its interests  xadversely affected by grant of the Application because it would: a) authorize 7B(2) Partnership to  xQestablish a CGSA that overlaps Colorado 7 Partnership's CGSA; b) authorize 7B(2) Partnership to provide  xcellular service in competition with Colorado 7 Partnership; c) potentially cause Colorado 7 Partnership  xto experience subscriber capture interference; and d) potentially cause Colorado 7 Partnership to experience  S ' xa reduction in overall subscriber capacity.  X~4ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#Petition at 2.#Xj\  P6G;XP#ѓ However, 7B(2) Partnership argues that the grant of its  xApplication is authorized by section 22.912(b), (c) and (d) of the Commission's rules which permits  S ' xservice area boundary (SAB) extensions in certain situations.  X4ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#Motion at 3.#Xj\  P6G;XP#ы Section 22.912(b) and (c) of the  xMCommission's rules, however, require the consent of the adjacent licensee for a SAB extension into its  S7' xCGSA.7=  X4ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#See 47 C.F.R.  22.912 (b), (c), and (d).#Xj\  P6G;XP#ѱ Because 7B(2) Partnership has not demonstrated Colorado 7 Partnership's consent to the SAB  xextension, it has not met the requirements of section 22.912 of the Commission's rules. Consequently,  S' xthe Application is defective under section 22.911(d)(2)(i) of the Commission's rules,CA  X_4 " ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#Section 22.911(d)(2)(i) states that subscriber traffic is captured if a SAB of one cellular system overlaps the  x CGSA of another operating cellular system. Therefore, cellular licensees must not begin to operate any facility that  xH would cause a SAB to overlap the existing CGSA of another cellular system on the same channel block, without first obtaining the written consent of the licensee of that system. 47 C.F.R.  22.911(d)(2)(i).C which affords  xxprotection from capture of subscriber traffic in this situation, and requires written consent to overlap with  Sk' xan existing license area.gk X#4ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#Id.g Again, because neither party demonstrates that Colorado 7 Partnership has given  xwritten consent to the SAB extension, Colorado 7 Partnership is protected from a potential capture of  S' xcsubscriber traffic under section 22.911 of the Commission's rules. XM&4ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#Id.#Xj\  P6G;XP#ш We conclude that Colorado 7"Y,''"  xPartnership is afforded protection from the overlap, which would result if the Application were granted.  S'Therefore, we dismiss the Application{ X54 " ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#We note that 7B(2) Partnership#Xj\  P6G;XP##X\  P6G;/P# may file another application in this market proposing to serve at least 50 square miles of unserved area, so long as its contour does not overlap another licensee's CGSA.{ and grant the Petition.  "9. Finally, we address 7B(2) Partnership's argument that the purpose of Petitioner's Petition was  xto delay processing of 7B(2) Partnership's Application and therefore should be characterized as a Strike  S' xPetition.A X4ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#Motion at 4.#Xj\  P6G;XP#ы A strike petition is a petition filed in bad faith for the primary purpose of blocking, impeding  S' xor delaying the grant of an application. } X` 4 " ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#William P. Johnson and Hollis P. Johnson, d/b/a Radio Carrollton, 69 F.C.C. 2d 1139, 1150 (1978) (Radio  {OI ' xt Carrollton), clarified, 69 F.C.C. 2d 424 (1978), recon. denied, 72 F.C.C. 2d 264 (1979), aff'd sub nom. Faulkner  {O 'Radio, Inc. v. FCC, No. 791749 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 15, 1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 1041 (1981).#Xj\  P6G;XP#  The following factors from Radio Carrollton are used to  xdetermine whether a petition is a strike petition: (1) statements by the petitioner's principals or officers  x"admitting the obstructive purpose; (2) the withholding of information relevant to disposition of the  xZrequested issues; (3) the absence of any reasonable basis for the adverse allegations in the petition; (4)  S' xeconomic motivation indicating a delaying purpose; and (5) other conduct of the petitioner. 7 X4ԍ#X\  P6G;/P#Radio Carrollton, 69 F.C.C. 2d at 1151.#Xj\  P6G;XP#Ѳ We conclude  xthat because Petitioner has a meritorious claim, the Petition cannot be characterized as a Strike Petition. Thus, we deny 7B(2) Partnership's Motion for a Finding that Petitioner's Petition is a Strike Petition.   S 'D IV. CONCLUSION Đ\  "810. Having reviewed the pleadings filed in this matter, we conclude that the grant of the above  xcaptioned application would be in violation of section 22.911(d)(2)(i) of the Commission's rules.  xAccordingly, we grant Petitioner's Petition to Dismiss or Deny, dismiss 7B(2) Partnership's Phase II  xcellular unserved area application, and dismiss 7B(2) Partnership's Motion for a Finding that Petitioner's Petition is a Strike Petition.  Sl'  S9'-V. ORDERING CLAUSES Đ\  "11. In view of the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED, that, pursuant to sections 4(i) and 309(d) of the  xQCommunications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 309(d), and sections 1.41 and 22.130 of  xthe Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.41, 22.130, the Petition to Dismiss or Deny filed by CommNet  xCellular Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary, Cellular Inc. Network Corporation on January 30, 1996, IS HEREBY GRANTED.  "12. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that, pursuant to sections 4(i) and 309(d) of the Communications  xAct of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i) and 309(d), and sections 22.128 and 22.911 of the  x"Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  22.128, 22.911, the Application of Colorado RSA 7B(2) Limited  xPartnership for Phase II Unserved Area Application for Market Nos. 354(B), Colorado 7Saguache RSA, and 356(B) Colorado 9Costilla RSA filed on November 20, 1995, IS HEREBY DISMISSED." ,''"Ԍ "ԙ13. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to section 4(i) of the Communications Act of  x1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), Colorado RSA 7B(2) Limited Partnership's Motion for a Finding that CommNet Cellular Inc.'s Petition is a Strike Petition filed on February 13, 1996, IS DENIED.  "14. This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to section 0.331 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.331. ` `  hhCqFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ` `  hhCqSteven E. Weingarten ` `  hhCqChief, Commercial Wireless Division ` `  hhCqWireless Telecommunications Bureau