******************************************************** 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 ) ) AIRTOUCH PAGING OF CALIFORNIA, ) ) Complainant, ) ) File No. E-98-08 v. ) ) GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________ ) __________________________________ In the Matter of ) ) AIRTOUCH PAGING OF TEXAS, ) ) Complainant, ) ) File No. E-98-10 v. ) ) GTE SOUTHWEST, INCORPORATED, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________ ) ORDER Adopted: August 5 , 1998; Released: August 5, 1998 By the Chief, Formal Complaints & Investigations Branch, Enforcement Division, Common Carrier Bureau: 1. AirTouch Paging of California, a commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) provider, filed a formal complaint, File No. E-98-08, against GTE California, Inc., a local exchange carrier (LEC), on November 13, 1997. AirTouch Paging of Texas, a CMRS provider, filed a formal complaint, File No. E-98-10, against GTE Southwest, Inc., a LEC, on November 21, 1997. AirTouch Paging of California and AirTouch Paging of Texas will be referenced collectively herein as "AirTouch." GTE California, Inc. and GTE Southwest, Inc., will be referenced collectively herein as "GTE." In both complaints, AirTouch alleged that GTE had violated Sections 201, 202, and 251 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and the Commission's rules by refusing to provide additional interconnection facilities for AirTouch, and by billing AirTouch for charges associated with the delivery of GTE-originated traffic to AirTouch's facilities. On July 22, 1998, Airtouch filed a motion requesting that we dismiss both complaints with prejudice. Airtouch stated that all issues raised by the complaints have been settled. 2. We are satisfied that granting Airtouch's motion 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 motion to dismiss the above-captioned formal complaints with prejudice filed by AirTouch IS GRANTED. 4. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the above-captioned complaints ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and that these proceedings ARE TERMINATED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Kurt A. Schroeder Chief, Formal Complaints and Investigations Branch Enforcement Division Common Carrier Bureau