******************************************************** NOTICE ******************************************************** This document was converted from WordPerfect to ASCII Text format. Content from the original version of the document such as headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers will not show up in this text version. All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the original document will not show up in this text version. Features of the original document layout such as columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins will not be preserved in the text version. If you need the complete document, download the WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available. ***************************************************************** Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) BRIAN ROBERTSON and COLORADO ) COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK, INC., ) Complainants, ) ) File No. E-96-39 v. ) ) NOS COMMUNICATIONS, INC., ) Defendant. ) ORDER Adopted: March 28, 1997 : Released: April 3, 1997 By the Chief, Formal Complaints and Investigations Branch, Enforcement Division, Common Carrier Bureau: 1. On July 25, 1996, Brian Robertson and Colorado Communications Network, Inc. ("Complainants") filed, pursuant to Section 208 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the "Act"), 47 U.S.C.  208, their complaint against Defendant, NOS Communications, Inc. ("NOS"), a provider of long distance telecommunications services. The complaint alleged that NOS's marketing practices and the manner in which it billed for its long-distance services violated Section 201(b) of the Act, 47 U.S.C.  201(b). It also alleged rate discrimination and the failure to tariff certain surcharges in violation of Sections 202(a) and 203(c) of the Act, 47 U.S.C.  202(a), 203(c). During the course of the proceeding, NOS also filed an Emergency Application for Review, challenging the Commission's jurisdiction over this matter. 2. The Complainants and the Defendant have advised the Commission that they have reached a settlement of the issues raised in the complaint, and they have filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice (the "Joint Motion"). The Joint Motion represents, and we find, that the dismissal of the complaint with prejudice will serve the public interest by eliminating the need for further litigation and the expenditure of further time and resources by the parties and by the Commission. 3. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), and 208 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  151, 154(i), 154(j), 208, and the authority delegated in Sections 0.91 and 0.291 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, 0.291, that the Joint Motion is GRANTED. 4. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the above-captioned complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and that this proceeding IS TERMINATED. 5. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendant's Emergency Application for Review is DISMISSED AS MOOT. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Kurt A. Schroeder Chief, Formal Complaints and Investigations Branch Enforcement Division Common Carrier Bureau