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

******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

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




                                 )
In the Matter of                  )
                                 )
Operator Communications, Inc.,    )
                                 )
                            Com-  )
plainant,                         )
                                 )
v.                                )
                                 )
Verizon     California,    Inc.,  )
Verizon     Washington,    D.C.,  )   File No. EB-04-MDIC-0096
Verizon New  York, Inc., Verizon  )
Delaware,      Inc.,     Verizon  )
Florida,  Inc.,  Verizon Hawaii,  )
Inc.,  Verizon  Northwest, Inc.,  )
Verizon    New   Jersey,   Inc.,  )
Verizon   New   England,   Inc.,  )
Verizon     Southwest,     Inc.,  )
Verizon    Pennsylvania,   Inc.,  )
Verizon   North,  Inc.,  Verizon  )
Virginia,  Inc.,  Verizon South, 
Inc.,   Verizon  West  Virginia, 
Inc.,  and GTE  Southwest, Inc., 
d/b/a Verizon Southwest,

                          Defen-
dants.

                            ORDER


       Adopted:  January 4, 2005        Released:    January 
     4, 2005

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

On July 6, 2004, pursuant to section 1.716 of the Commission 
rules,1 Operator Communications, Inc., (``OCI'') filed an 
informal complaint against Verizon California, Inc., Verizon 
Washington, D.C., Verizon New York, Inc., Verizon Delaware, 
Inc., Verizon Florida, Inc., Verizon Hawaii, Inc., Verizon 
Northwest, Inc., Verizon New Jersey, Inc., Verizon New 
England, Inc., Verizon Southwest, Inc., Verizon 
Pennsylvania, Inc., Verizon North, Inc., Verizon Virginia, 
Inc., Verizon South, Inc., Verizon West Virginia, Inc., and 
GTE Southwest, Inc., d/b/a Verizon Southwest (collectively, 
``Verizon'') in the above-captioned matter.2  On July 16, 
2004, OCI responded to written questions posed by Commission 
staff,3 and on September 3, 2004, Verizon responded to OCI's 
informal complaint.4  Both parties agreed to participate in 
FCC-supervised mediation, which was initially scheduled for 
December 23, 2004.  At the request of the parties, the 
mediation session was rescheduled for January 11, 2005.  
Pursuant to section 1.718 of the Commission's rules,5 OCI is 
required to convert its informal complaint into a formal 
complaint by January 6, 2005 to ensure that, for purposes of 
the statute of limitations, the formal complaint relates 
back to the July 6, 2004 filing date of the informal 
complaint. 

On December 23, 2004, OCI, with the consent of Verizon, 
requested that the FCC extend the conversion deadline for 
four months, until April 30, 2005.6  OCI therefore requests 
that the Commission waive section 1.718 of the Commission's 
rules, and further extend until April 30, 2005 the period in 
which OCI can convert its informal complaint to a formal 
complaint, in order to provide the parties time to mediate 
their dispute and resolve the matter without the need for 
formal litigation.  OCI indicates in its letter requesting 
an extension that counsel for Verizon has consented to this 
request.7 

We are satisfied that granting OCI's request for extension 
will serve the public interest by promoting the private 
resolution of disputes and by postponing the need for 
further litigation and expenditure of further time and 
resources of the parties and of this Commission until such 
time as may actually be necessary.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), 
and 208 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 
U.S.C.  154(i), 154(j), and 208, and sections 1.3 and 
1.718 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, 1.718, 
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 
OCI's request for extension IS GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, unless otherwise extended by 
order, the deadlines that would otherwise apply under 
section 1.718 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.718, 
are hereby waived, and the date on which OCI must convert 
its informal complaints against OCI into a formal complaint 
pursuant to section 1.718 of the Commission's rules, 47 
C.F.R.  1.718, is extended to April 30, 2005.

                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION




                         Alexander P. Starr 
                         Chief,  Market Disputes  Resolution 
                    Division
                         Enforcement Bureau


_________________________

1  47 C.F.R.  1.716.

2 Letter from Danny E. Adams, counsel for OCI, to Alexander 
P.  Starr,  Chief,  Market  Disputes  Resolution  Division, 
Enforcement Bureau, File No. EB-04-MDIC-0096 (filed July 6, 
2004).  

3 Letter from Danny E. Adams, counsel for OCI, to Alexander 
P.  Starr,  Chief,  Market  Disputes  Resolution  Division, 
Enforcement  Bureau, File  No. EB-04-MDIC-0096  (filed July 
16, 2004).

4  Letter from  Kathleen  Grillo, counsel  for Verizon,  to 
Radhika  Karmarkar,   Chief,  Market   Disputes  Resolution 
Division,  Enforcement  Bureau,  File  No.  EB-04-MDIC-0096 
(filed September 3, 2004).

5  47 C.F.R.  1.718.

6 Letter from  Danny E. Adams, counsel for  OCI, to Radhika 
Karmarkar, Market Disputes Resolution Division, Enforcement 
Bureau, File No. EB-04-MDIC-0095 (filed December 23, 2004).

7  Id.