Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version


This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

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
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.


                         Before the
                   Washington, D.C.  20554

In the Matter of                   )
Petition for Declaratory Ruling to      )
Declare Unlawful Certain Joint          )    File No. 00-MD-
Marketing Practices by             )
Pacific Bell                                             )  

     Adopted:  February 5, 2002         Released:  February 
6, 2002

By the Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division, 
Enforcement Bureau:

     1.   On February 11, 2000, Nationwide Business 
Telephone Systems, L.L.C., Formerly Nationwide Business 
Telephones, Inc., Doing Business As Team Centrex (``Team 
Centrex''), filed the captioned petition seeking a 
declaratory ruling that certain marketing practices 
surrounding the Centrex service of Pacific Bell Telephone 
Company, were unlawful.  Team Centrex filed this petition in 
connection with its pending federal antitrust action, 
Nationwide Business Telephone Systems, L.L.C. v. Pacific 
Bell, United States District Court for the Central District 
of California, Western Division, Case No. 98-CV-10375 CAS 
(Ex), which the federal court stayed pending resolution of 
the FCC matter.  

     2.   The parties recently entered into negotiations for 
the purpose of settling their disputes.  On February 4, 
2002, they filed a joint motion to dismiss the petition 
pending against Pacific Bell with prejudice, stating that 
the parties have settled their disputes.

     3.   We are satisfied that dismissing the petition will 
serve the public interest by promoting the private 
resolution of disputes and by eliminating the need for 
further litigation and the expenditure of further time and 
resources of the parties and this Commission.

     4.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 
1, 4(i), 4(j), 201(b), and 208 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  151, 154(i), 154(j), 201(b), 
and 208, and the authority delegated in sections 0.111 and 
0.311 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.111 and 
0.311, that the joint motion to dismiss the above-captioned 
petition with prejudice IS GRANTED.     5.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the above-captioned 
petition IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and that the proceeding 


                         Alexander P. Starr
                         Chief, Market Disputes Resolution 
                         Enforcement Bureau