******************************************************** NOTICE ******************************************************** This document was converted from WordPerfect or Word to ASCII Text format. 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 Word or WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available. ***************************************************************** Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 Yellow Book USA, Inc., ) ) Complainant, ) ) v. ) File No. EB-00-MD-013 ) Bell Atlantic Corporation, d/b/a Verizon ) Communications; and its subsidiaries ) and affiliates, including but not limited to, ) Bell Atlantic Network Services, Inc.; ) New York Telephone Company, d/b/a ) Bell Atlantic - New York; Bell Atlantic - ) New Jersey, Inc.; Bell Atlantic - ) Pennsylvania, Inc.; New England ) Telephone and Telegraph Company, ) d/b/a Bell Atlantic - New England; ) Bell Atlantic - Maryland, Inc.; Bell ) Atlantic - Virginia, Inc.; Bell ) Atlantic - West Virginia, Inc.; Bell ) Atlantic - Delaware, Inc.; and Bell ) Atlantic - Washington, D.C., ) ) Defendants. ) ORDER Adopted: August 25, 2000 Released: August 28, 2000 By the Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division, Enforcement Bureau: 1. On July 21, 2000, Yellow Book USA, Inc. (Yellow Book USA) filed the captioned complaint against Bell Atlantic Corporation (Bell Atlantic), alleging, among other things, that Bell Atlantic violated section 222(e) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 222(e). In short, Yellow Book USA maintained that, since the date of enactment of section 222(e), Bell Atlantic's rates for subscriber list information (SLI) have been unreasonable because they have been based on the value of the SLI (as determined subjectively by Bell Atlantic) rather than on cost. 2. The parties recently entered into negotiations for the purpose of settling their dispute. On August 25, 2000, they filed a joint motion to dismiss the complaint pending against Bell Atlantic with prejudice. 3. 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. 4. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 208 and 222(e) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 151, 154(i), 154(j), 208 and 222(e), 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 complaint with prejudice IS GRANTED. 5. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the above-captioned complaint IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and that the proceeding IS TERMINATED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Glenn T. Reynolds Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division Enforcement Bureau