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
                Federal Communications Commission
                     Washington, D.C.  20554

Broadview Networks, Inc.,        )
         Complainant,            )
                                 )    File No. EB-04-MDIC-0105
v.                               )
Verizon Telephone Companies and  )
Verizon New York, Inc.,          )


Adopted:  May 10, 2005                  Released:  May 11, 2005

By the Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division, Enforcement 

     1.   On April 15, 2005, the complainant, Broadview Networks, 
Inc. (``Broadview''), and the defendants, Verizon Telephone 
Companies and Verizon New York Inc. (``Verizon''), filed a joint 
motion to withdraw with prejudice the Complaint1 that Broadview 
filed against Verizon on December 20, 2003.2  In short, the 
Complaint alleges that Verizon violated sections 201(b) and 203 
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (47 U.S.C.  
201(b) and 203), by improperly backbilling for collocation 
charges, imposing charges that are not listed in Verizon's 
federal tariff, and imposing charges from a state tariff for 
services ordered under a federal tariff.  The Motion states that 
the parties ``have entered into a Settlement Agreement effective 
March 18, 2005, under which the Parties successfully resolved 
their outstanding collocation and termination issues.''3

     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, and the 
authority delegated in sections 0.111, 0.311, and 1.716-1.718 of 
the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.111, 0.311, and 1.716-
1.718, that the Motion is GRANTED, and that the Complaint is 
DISMISSED with prejudice.


                              Alexander P. Starr
                              Chief, Market Disputes Resolution 
                              Enforcement Bureau


1 Formal Complaint of Broadview Networks, Inc., File No. EB-03-
MD-021 (filed Dec. 30, 2003) (``Complaint''). 
2 Joint Notice of Withdrawal of Broadview Network, Inc.'s Formal 
Complaint, File No. EB-03-MD-021 (filed Apr.15, 2005) 
(``Motion'').  The original file number assigned to this 
proceeding was EB-03-MD-021, which is the number the Motion 
references.  On November 10, 2004, however, the Enforcement 
Bureau partially granted a Motion to Dismiss or, in the 
Alternative, Defer that Verizon filed on August 4, 2004.  See 
Broadview Networks, Inc. v. Verizon Telephone Companies and 
Verizon New York, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 
22216 (Enf. Bur. 2004) (``Dismissal Order'').  The Dismissal 
Order deferred proceedings relating to Broadview's formal 
complaint in light of a court order directing the parties to 
proceed to arbitration.  Id., 19 FCC Rcd at 22216,  1.  The 
Dismissal Order also converted, for purposes of internal docket 
administration only, Broadview's formal complaint to an informal 
complaint, while the parties pursued arbitration.  Id.  In so 
doing, the Bureau assigned this matter a new docket number:  EB-
04-MDIC-0105.  Today's Order dismisses with prejudice the 
informal complaint proceeding.  There presently is no formal 
complaint proceeding pending before the Commission, and under 
this Order, no complaint of any kind could be filed by Broadview 
at the Commission regarding the subject matter raised in 
Broadview's filings here. 
3 Motion at 2.