******************************************************** 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 ) ) Illinois Bell Telephone Company d/b/a ) Ameritech Illinois ) Indiana Bell Telephone Company d/b/a ) Ameritech Indiana ) Michigan Bell Telephone Company d/b/a ) Ameritech Michigan ) File No. E-97-42 The Ohio Bell Telephone Company d/b/a ) Ameritech Ohio, and ) Wisconsin Bell, Inc. d/b/a ) Ameritech Wisconsin ) ) Complainants ) ) v. ) ) MCI Telecommunications Corp. ) ) Defendant. ) ORDER Adopted: July 14, 1998 Released: July 14, 1998 By the Deputy Chief, Formal Complaints and Investigations Branch, Enforcement Division, Common Carrier Bureau: 1. On July 30, 1997, Ameritech Illinois, Ameritech Indiana, Ameritech Michigan, Ameritech Ohio and Ameritech Wisconsin (Complainants) filed the above-captioned formal complaint against MCI Telecommunications Corporation (MCI), alleging that MCI violated Sections 258 and 201(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 64.1100 and 64.1150 of the Commission's rules by submitting to Complainants for processing presubscribed carrier (PC) changes that were not properly authorized and verified. MCI filed its Answer on September 15, 1997, in which it denied the allegations contained in the Complaint. The parties thereafter entered into negotiations in an effort to settle the matters in controversy. On July 10, 1998, the parties filed a Joint Motion advising the Commission that they had reached a mutually satisfactory settlement, and requested that the Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. 2. We are satisfied that dismissal of the Complaint herein will serve the public interest by eliminating the need for further litigation and the expenditure of further time and resources by the Commission and the parties. 3. 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 Joint Motion to Dismiss the above-captioned complaint with prejudice is GRANTED. 4. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the above-captioned complaint IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and the proceeding IS TERMINATED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Diane Griffin Harmon Deputy Chief, Formal Complaints and Investigations Branch Enforcement Division Common Carrier Bureau