FCC Record, Volume 27, No. 7, Pages 5674 to 6652, May 23 - June 15, 2012 Page: 5,735

II. DISCUSSION
A. The Tracy Filings Are Procedurally Insufficient
1. Tracy Lacks Standing
6. In the Petition, Tracy asserts that he "has standing to object to the Convey-Green Eagle
Networks application and Green Eagle's petition and waiver request because he is a stockholder owning
twenty seven million, six hundred sixty seven thousand one hundred forty (27,667,140) shares of its
[Telemetrix's] issued and outstanding common stock."20 The Applicants respond that Tracy does not
have standing as a party in interest.21 In particular, they state that Tracy does not claim to be a competitor
for PCS service in the market covered by the licenses subject to the Application, that the only basis on
which he claims an interest are matters that are being addressed in other forums, and that to the extent
Tracy claims to be a Telemetrix shareholder, his interests should be represented by appropriate corporate
officers.22 In the Tracy Reply, Tracy states "[t]he Petitioner has standing as a party in interest, pursuant to
Section 1.939(a) of the Rules,"23 but provides no further elaboration.
7. We find that Tracy has failed to establish standing to challenge the Application. To
establish party-in-interest standing, a petitioner must allege facts sufficient to demonstrate that grant of
the subject application would cause it to suffer a direct injury.24 In addition, a petitioner must
demonstrate a causal link between the claimed injury and the challenged action.2s To demonstrate a
causal link, a petitioner must establish that the injuries can be traced to the challenged action and the
injury would be prevented or redressed by the relief requested.26 Tracy has alleged he has standing
simply because he is a shareholder in the parent company of Convey. Aside from generalized claims of
fraud, he has not alleged facts sufficient to demonstrate that grant of the Application would cause him to
suffer a direct injury. Tracy also has not shown that any claimed injury would be prevented by denial of
the Application. Accordingly, on that basis alone, we dismiss the Petition, the Tracy Informal Objection,
and the Tracy Request for Hearing.
2. The Petition Was Untimely Filed
8. As noted above, the Application was placed on public notice as accepted for filing on
June 15, 2011, and Tracy filed the Petition on July 6, 2011. Applicants allege that "[t]he Petition was late
filed by a week."27 Tracy at no time addressed Applicants' argument that the Petition should be
dismissed since it was late filed.
9. Section 1.948(j)(1)(iii) of the Commission's rules specifies a 14-day petition to deny
period: "Petitions to deny filed in accordance with section 309(d) of the Communications Act must
20 Petition at 6. Tracy also states that he has filed a lawsuit against Telemetrix seeking inspection of corporate
materials and that Telemetrix has not made a single required SEC report for two years, depriving him and other
Telemetrix shareholders of information regarding Telemetrix's operations. Id. at 6-7.
21 Joint Opposition at 4.
22 Id. at 4-5.
23 Tracy Reply at 7.
24 Wireless Co., L.P., Order, 10 FCC Rcd 13233, 13235 7 (WTB 1995) (Wireless Co.), citing Sierra Club v.
Morton, 405 U.S. 727, 733 (1972).
25 Wireless Co., 10 FCC Red at 13235 7.
26 Id.
27 Joint Opposition at 3.

5735

Federal Communications Commission

DA 12-816