********************************************************    
                         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                     )
                                     )
Information Providers Group,         )
                                     )
       Complainant,                  )
                                             )
               v.                    )       File No. E-91-105                    
                                     )
Telesphere Communications, Inc.,     )       
                                     )
       Defendant.                    )
                                     )

                                  ORDER

           Adopted:  June 30, 1998;    Released:  July 1, 1998


By the Deputy Chief, Formal Complaints and Investigations Branch, Enforcement Division,
Common Carrier Bureau:

     1.     On June 25, 1991, Information Providers Group ("Infoproviders"), an ad hoc
association, filed the above-captioned complaint against Telesphere Communications, Inc.
("Telesphere") pursuant to Section 208 of the Communications Act ("the Act"), 47 U.S.C.  208,
alleging violations of Sections 201 and 202 of the Act, 47 U.S.C.  201, 202.

     2.     On November 4, 1991, a Notice of Bankruptcy was served on the Commission by
Telesphere.  The Notice informed the Commission that on September 11, 1991, Telesphere filed
a petition for bankruptcy in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. 
The Notice stated that, pursuant to Section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C.  362, "all
proceedings are stayed against Defendants."

     3.     During the pendency of this action, the complainant has ceased to function as an
active entity, although it did not move to withdraw its complaint, nor did its counsel of record
move to withdraw as counsel.

     4.     It appears from the information submitted by IPG's counsel in response to our
inquiries about the status of the concurrent pending bankruptcy proceeding in the Illinois district
court that said bankruptcy proceeding has been the cause of the inactivity in this formal
complaint proceeding.  Although IPG's counsel has represented that the bankruptcy proceeding
has been substantially completed, the Commission has not been notified that the stay issued by
the Illinois district court has been lifted.  IPG contends that the stay of bankruptcy proceedings
prevents the Commission from dismissing this case for failure of IPG to proceed with its
prosecution, but states that if the Commission "concludes that it does have jurisdiction to dismiss
this matter, IPG requests that the Commission should only do so with an affirmative statement
that such action is taken solely for the purpose of removing this matter from the Commission's
docket and is without prejudice to the rights of the members of IPG to pursue their claims against
Telesphere and its lenders . . . ."

     5.     We conclude that, under the circumstances of this proceeding, the stay issued by
the Illinois district court does not bar us from dismissing this formal complaint proceeding
without prejudice.  The district court's stay bars further action against Telesphere or Telesphere's
bankruptcy estate.  By dismissing IPG's complaint, we are not determining any claims against
Telesphere.  We are merely removing from our active docket a formal complaint proceeding that
has been pending for more than 7 years, and that IPG has not represented that it will be able to
resume within any reasonable amount of time.
      
     6.     We are satisfied that dismissing this complaint without prejudice will serve the
public interest by promoting the efficient management of the Branch's formal complaints docket
and eliminating the unnecessary expenditure of additional time and resources of the Commission. 
Moreover, because we are dismissing the complaint without prejudice, IPG may, upon conclusion
of the bankruptcy proceeding, refile its complaint against Telesphere. 
     7.     Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i), 4(j), and 208 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 154(j), 208, and the authority
delegated under Sections 0.91 and 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, 0.291,
that the above-captioned complaint IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.


                           FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION



                           Diane Griffin Harmon
                           Deputy Chief, Formal Complaints and
                           Investigations Branch
                           Enforcement Division
                           Common Carrier Bureau