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                  )
Ketchikan Internet Services,      )
David Brown, and Richard          )
Watson,                           )
                        Com-      )   File No. EB-04-MD-001
plainants,                        )
         v.                      )
City of Ketchikan d/b/a           )
Ketchikan Public Utilities,


     Adopted:  June 2, 2004        Released:  June 2, 2004

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

     1.   On May 28, 2004, the complainants, Ketchikan 
Internet Services, David Brown, and Richard Watson 
(``KIS''), and the defendant, City of Ketchikan d/b/a 
Ketchikan Public Utilities (``KPU''), filed a Stipulation of 
Dismissal With Prejudice1 seeking dismissal of the above-
captioned proceeding, which was initiated by a Complaint 
filed on January 9, 2004.2  The Complaint alleged, inter 
alia, that KPU unlawfully subsidized its competitive 
internet service business with the proceeds of its non-
competitive telephone business in violation of  254(e) and 
(k).3  The Stipulation of Dismissal is signed by counsel for 
both complainants and defendant and states that all parties 
to the proceeding ``hereby stipulate that all claims 
asserted in such proceeding are hereby dismissed with 
prejudice, each party to bear its own costs and fees.''4

     2.   We are satisfied that dismissing the Complaint 
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.

     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), and 208, sections 
1.720-1.729 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.720-
1.729, 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 Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice is 
GRANTED, and that the Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice.

     4.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the above-captioned 
proceeding is TERMINATED.


                         Alexander P. Starr
                         Chief, Market Disputes Resolution 
                         Enforcement Bureau

1 Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice, File No. EB-04-
MD-001 (filed May 28, 2004) (``Stipulation of Dismissal''). 
2 Complaint, File No. EB-04-MD-001 (filed Jan. 9, 2004) 
3 47. U.S.C.  254(e) and (k).
4 Stipulation of Dismissal at 1.