Experimental Service • Petition for Reconsideration • “New Argument”
Executive Transp. Co., Inc. v. Pa. Public Util. Comm’n. , PICS Case No. 16-0569 (Pa. Commw. April 22, 2016) Cohn Jubelirer, J. (15 pages).
Public Utility Commission did not err in denying taxi company’s petition for reconsideration of PUC order granting authorization to Uber subsidiary to provide experimental service pursuant to 52 Pa. C. §29.352, because the petition for reconsideration failed to meet the standard articulated in Duick v. Pennsylvania Gas and Water Co. of raising new arguments and only asserted the same arguments that the ALJ and the PUC had already addressed and decided against the taxi company. Affirmed.
