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

Dr. Bonnie O'Day,                )
Complainant,                     )
v.                               )    File Nos.
Audiovox          Communications )    EB-03-TC-F-004
Corporation                      )
and                              )
                                )    EB-03-TC-F-001                 
Cellco    Partnership,     d/b/a )
Verizon Wireless,                )



                    Adopted:  March 12, 2003                                                                      
                    Released:  March 13, 2003

By the Chief, Telecommunications Consumers Division,  Enforcement 

  On  February   21,  2003,  Dr.   Bonnie  O'Day  (``O'Day''   or 
``Complainant'') filed a formal  complaint alleging, among  other 
things, that  many  of  the  features  of  a  wireless  telephone 
developed  by  Audiovox  Communications  Corporation  and  Cellco 
Parnership   d/b/a   Verizon   Wireless   (``Defendants'')    are 
inaccessible to blind or visually-impaired users.  In a Notice of 
Formal   Complaint   issued   on    February   28,   2003,    the 
Telecommunications Consumers Division (``Division'') set forth  a 
pleading cycle for the O'Day formal complaint proceeding.1  

On March 7,  2003, the  Defendants jointly  filed an  ``Unopposed 
Motion   of   Defendants   to   Modify   Procedural    Schedule'' 
(``Motion''), requesting  that the  pleading cycle  be  modified.  
The Defendants ask that we adopt their modified pleading schedule 
because it is in all of the parties' best interests to compile  a 
complete written  record for  Commission decision  on the  issues 
raised in the formal complaint proceeding.2  Further,  Defendants 
assert that  a ``modest  extension of  time for  the  Defendants' 
[sic]  to  submit  their   initial  filings,  coupled  with   the 
Defendants' agreement to  waive challenges to  the timeliness  of 
the  Complainant's  interrogatory  requests,''  will   facilitate 
production of a complete record and assist the Commission in  its 
decision-making  process.3   In  a   conference  call  with   the 
Commission staff held on March 7, 2003, all parties  acknowledged 
that the proposed modifications in the procedural schedule  would 
be acceptable to them. 

We are satisfied  that granting the  Defendants' joint  unopposed 
Motion  will  serve   the  public  interest   by  promoting   the 
development of  a complete  record  in this  proceeding,  without 
harming any of the  parties involved.  We  therefore set out  the 
following modified procedural  schedule and  instructions to  the 

       1)      On or before April  1, 2003, the defendants  shall 
          file and serve  their request  for Interrogatories,  if 
          any, pursuant to 47 C.F.R. 1.729.

       2)      The defendants shall, on or before April 1,  2003, 
          file and serve an answer to the complaint that complies 
          with 47 C.F.R. 1.724.

       3)      The complainant  shall,  on or  before  April  11, 
          2003, file  and  serve  a  reply  to  the  answer  that 
          complies with 47 C.F.R. 1.726.

       4)      The complainant  shall,  on or  before  April  11, 
          2003, file and serve its request for up to fifteen (15) 
          interrogatories upon each of  the Defendants, and  file 
          and serve any opposition and objections to  defendants' 
          request for interrogatories, if any.  47 C.F.R. 1.729.

       5)      The defendants shall, on or before April 18, 2003, 
          file any opposition and objections to the complainants' 
          request for interrogatories, if any.  47 C.F.R. 1.729.

       6)      An initial  status conference  in this  proceeding 
          has been scheduled for April  22, 2003, at 10:00  a.m., 
          in the Third Floor North Conference Room (Room  3-B142) 
          of the  Federal  Communications  Commission,  445  12th 
          Street, S.W., Washington,  D.C. 20554.  After  reaching 
          the 3rd Floor-North elevator lobby, the parties  should 
          call Amy  Goodman at  418-1549 to  be escorted  to  the 
          conference room.  See 47 C.F.R. 1.733.  Counsel should 
          be prepared to spend at least two hours in conference.

       7)      The parties  shall  meet prior  to  attending  the 
          initial status conference.  One purpose of that meeting 
          is to  resolve or  narrow as  many issues  as  possible 
          prior to  the conference.   The parties  shall  discuss 
          matters  including,  but  not  limited  to,  settlement 
          prospects,  discovery,  factual  and  legal  issues  in 
          dispute, pleading  schedules,  and the  creation  of  a 
          joint statement  of stipulated  facts, disputed  facts, 
          and key legal issues.  See 47 C.F.R. 1.733(b)(1).

       8)      The  parties  shall   file  with  the   Commission 
          Secretary and the  Commission counsel  (Amy Goodman)  a 
          joint statement  of all  proposals  agreed to  and  any 
          disputes remaining with respect  to the matters  listed 
          in 47 C.F.R.  1.733(b)(1)(i)-(iv) as a  result of  the 
          parties' meeting.  At the  same time, the parties  also 
          shall submit  a joint  statement of  stipulated  facts, 
          disputed facts, and  key legal issues.   See 47  C.F.R. 
          1.732(h), 1.733(b)(1)(v),  1.733(b)(2).   Both  joint 
          statements  must  be  hand-delivered  (if  counsel   is 
          located in the  Washington, D.C. area),  faxed, and  e-
          mailed to the  Commission counsel, and  filed with  the 
          Commission Secretary, on or before April 18, 2003.  See 
          47 C.F.R. 1.733(b)(2).  The  parties may submit  these 
          two joint statements in a  single document, as long  as 
          each is  separately  identified therein.   We  strongly 
          encourage the parties to  devote substantial effort  to 
          developing comprehensive and detailed joint statements.  
          See Implementation of Sections 255 and 251(a)(2) of the 
          Communications  Act  of   1934,  as   enacted  by   the 
          Telecommunications   Act    of    1996;    Access    to 
          Telecommunications     Service,      Telecommunications 
          Equipment and  Customer Premises  Equipment by  Persons 
          with Disabilities,   16 FCC  Rcd 6417,  5696-97  (1999) 
          (``Section 255 Order'').  

       9)      The parties  shall  review  the  formal  complaint 
          rules carefully to determine whether the  circumstances 
          of  this   proceeding  require   that  any   additional 
          pleadings, other than those  described herein, must  be 
          served  and   filed  prior   to  the   initial   status 
          conference.  See, e.g., 47  C.F.R.  1.726  (replies), 
          1.729 (discovery).

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), 208, 
and 255 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47  U.S.C. 
 154(i),  154(j), 208,  255, section  1.3 of  the  Commission's 
rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3,  and the authority delegated in  sections 
0.111 and 0.311 of  the Commission's rules,  47 C.F.R.   0.111, 
0.311,  that  the  Unopposed  Motion  of  Defendants  to   Modify 
Procedural Schedule IS GRANTED.


                              Colleen K. Heitkamp
                         Chief,   Telecommunications    Consumers 
                         Enforcement Bureau


1    See  O'Day  v.  Audiovox  Communications  Corporation   and 
Verizon Wireless,  Notice  of Formal  Complaint  (Deputy  Chief, 
Telecommunications Consumers Division), rel. Feb. 28, 2003.  The 
Notice inadvertently omitted  the second file  number for  these 
proceedings; both file  numbers are  set out in  the caption  to 
this Order.

2    Motion at 2.

3    Id.