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
Indiana Telcom Corporation, Inc. )
)
)
Complainant,
)
v. ) File No. EB-02-MD-022
)
Indiana Bell Telephone Company, Inc. )
d/b/a Ameritech Indiana and Ohio )
Bell Telephone Company, Inc. d/b/a )
Ameritech Ohio,
)
Defendant.
ORDER
Adopted: July 7, 2005 Released: July 8, 2005
By the Deputy Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division:
1. On April 26, 2002, Indiana Telcom Corporation, Inc.
filed with this Commission a formal complaint against
Indiana Bell Telephone Company, Inc. d/b/a Ameritech
Indiana and Ohio Bell Telephone Company, Inc. d/b/a
Ameritech Ohio, asserting that the Defendants violated
sections 201(b) and 203(c) of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended (the ``Act'') and Part 69 of the
Commission's rules1 by improperly assessing end user
common line (``EUCL'') charges on the Complainant's
payphones.2
2. On May 17, 2005, Complainant filed a motion requesting
that we dismiss the formal complaint in this proceeding
with prejudice, as the parties have settled their
dispute.3 We grant Complainant's motion to dismiss the
formal complaint, with prejudice. We find that dismissal
at this stage is appropriate and will serve the public
interest by promoting the private resolution of disputes
and eliminating the expenditure of further time and
resources of the parties and the Commission.
3. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1,
4(i), 4(j), and 208 of the Communications Act, as amended,
47 U.S.C. §§ 151, 154(i), 154(j), 208, sections 1.720-
1.736 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.720-1.736,
and the authority delegated by sections 0.111 and 0.311 of
the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111 and 0.311, that
the above-captioned complaint IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE
in its entirety and the proceeding is TERMINATED.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Rosemary McEnery, Deputy Chief
Market Disputes Resolution Division
Enforcement Bureau
_________________________
147 U.S.C. §§ 201(b) and 203(c); Telecommunications Act of 1996,
Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. (1996); 47 C.F.R. §§ 69.1 et. seq.
2Indiana Telcom Corporation, Inc. v. Indiana Bell Telephone
Company, Inc. d/b/a Ameritech Indiana and Ohio Bell Telephone
Company, Inc. d/b/a Ameritech Ohio, Supplement to Formal
Complaint, File No. EB-02-MD-022 (filed Apr. 26, 2002).
3Indiana Telcom Corporation, Inc. v. Indiana Bell Telephone
Company, Inc. d/b/a Ameritech Indiana and Ohio Bell Telephone
Company, Inc. d/b/a Ameritech Ohio, Notice of Settlement and
Motion to Dismiss Formal Complaint With Prejudice, FCC, File No.
EB-02-MD-022 (filed May 17, 2005).