Conditional Motion for Abeyance on Behalf of the Cities of Anaheim, Azusa, Banning, Colton, Pasadena, and Riverside, California,
Topics in the text: Filing procedure
Responses and related views
No section-specific public response is linked for this document.
Source sections
Printed headings where available; page ranges otherwise. Excerpts below are selected from the text by keyword.
Opening text
opening text · Topic match: Filing procedure
EL26-71-000 CONDITIONAL MOTION FOR ABEYANCE ON BEHALF OF THE CITIES OF ANAHEIM, AZUSA, BANNING, COLTON, PASADENA, AND RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA Pursuant to Rule 212 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure,1 the Cities of Anaheim, Azusa, Banning, Colton, Pasadena, and Riverside, California…Read this passage
I. MOTION FOR ABEYANCE
printed heading · Topic match: Filing procedure
In the Show Cause Order, the Commission explained that it would consider requests “to hold, for up to 90 days, all or certain aspects of this FPA section 206 proceeding in abeyance, including the deadline to respond to this order.”8 The purpose of the abeyance, according to the Commission, is to…Read this passage
II. CONCLUSION
printed heading
II.Read this passage
CONCLUSION
printed heading · Topic match: Filing procedure
CONCLUSION WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, the Six Cities respectfully request that the Commission grant the Six Cities’ request to hold the 60-day deadline to respond to the Show Cause Order in abeyance for an additional 90 days.Read this passage
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
printed heading
McNaul Attorney for the Cities of Anaheim, Azusa, Banning, Colton, Pasadena, and Riverside, California Law Offices of: Thompson Coburn LLP 1909 K Street, N.W., Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20006-1167 202.585.6900 202.585.6969 (facsimile)Read this passage