******************************************************** 
                      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 )

   )

   NextG Networks of Illinois, Inc., )

   )

   Complainant, ) File No. EB-09-MD-009

   )

   v. )

   )

   RCN Telecom Services of Illinois, LLC, )

   )

   Respondent. )

                               ORDER OF DISMISSAL

   Adopted: April 13, 2010 Released: April 13, 2010

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

   I. introduction

    1. On September 16, 2009, NextG Networks of Illinois, Inc. ("NextG")
       filed a pole attachment complaint against RCN Telecom Services of
       Illinois, LLC ("RCN") pursuant to section 224 of the Communications
       Act of 1934, as amended (the "Act"), and section 1.1404 of the
       Commission's rules alleging that RCN unlawfully denied access to RCN's
       underground conduit, located in Illinois, for the purpose of placing
       NextG's telecommunications lines. In its response, RCN argued that the
       Illinois Commerce Commission ("ICC") regulates pole attachments for
       telecommunications services and therefore has preempted this
       Commission's jurisdiction.

    2. On February 10, 2010, at the request of the Commission, the ICC filed
       comments in this proceeding stating that it has jurisdiction over the
       conduit at issue, and that it stands ready to adjudicate a dispute
       regarding pole attachments for telecommunications services.
       Specifically, the ICC stated that "Illinois has enacted a statutory
       scheme, which vests jurisdiction over the matter in the ICC" and that
       the ICC has "full authority to adjudicate an access dispute ... and to
       do so on an extraordinarily expedited basis."

    3. On March 25, 2010, NextG filed an Uncontested Motion to Withdraw
       Complaint Without Prejudice. In the Motion to Withdraw, NextG states
       that, while it "does not necessarily concede that the ICC's comments
       directly resolve the question of whether the ICC has adequately
       certified that it regulates the rates, terms, and conditions of
       conduit access for telecommunications providers," NextG no longer
       requests access to RCN's conduit at issue because the dispute is
       "currently moot." NextG asserts that "[n]o party will be prejudiced by
       withdrawal of NextG's Complaint without prejudice at this time." The
       Motion to Withdraw further represents that "[c]ounsel for RCN has
       informed counsel for NextG that RCN will not oppose NextG's withdrawal
       of its Complaint without prejudice as moot." Based on the foregoing
       facts, we are satisfied that the parties have shown good cause for
       granting the request to dismiss the complaint.

    4. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), and 224
       of the Act, as amended, 47 U.S.C. S:S: 154(i), 154(j), 224, and
       sections 1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. S:S:
       1.1401-1.1418, and the authority delegated in sections 0.111 and 0.311
       of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. S:S: 0.111, 0.311, that the
       Motion to Withdraw IS GRANTED.

    5. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), and 224 of the
       Act, as amended, 47 U.S.C. S:S: 154(i), 154(j), 224, and sections
       1.1401-1.1418 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. S:S: 1.1401-1.1418,
       and the authority delegated in sections 0.111 and 0.311 of the
       Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. S:S: 0.111, 0.311, that NextG's
       Complaint against RCN IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

   Lisa B. Griffin

   Deputy Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division

   Enforcement Bureau

   Pole Attachment Complaint, File No. EB-09-MD-009 (filed Sept. 16, 2009)
   ("Complaint").

   47 U.S.C. S: 224.

   47 C.F.R. S: 1.1404.

   First Amended Response of RCN Telecom Services of Illinois, LLC to
   Complaint of NextG Networks of Illinois, Inc. and Request for Dismissal
   with Prejudice, File No. EB-09-MD-009 (filed Oct. 15, 2009) ("Response").
   See 47 U.S.C. S: 224(c)(1) ("Nothing in this section shall be construed to
   apply to, or to give the Commission jurisdiction with respect to rates,
   terms, and conditions, or access to poles, ducts, conduits, and
   rights-of-way as provided in subsection (f) of this section, for pole
   attachments in any case where such matters are regulated by a State.").

   Letter from Lisa B. Griffin, Deputy Division Chief, Market Disputes
   Resolution Division, to Mary J. Stephenson Schroeder, General Counsel,
   Illinois Commerce Commission (dated Dec. 8, 2009).

   Comments of the Illinois Commerce Commission, File No. EB-09-MD-009 (filed
   Feb. 10, 2010) ("ICC Comments") at 11, 13.

   Uncontested Motion to Withdraw Complaint Without Prejudice, File No.
   EB-09-MD-009 (filed Mar. 25, 2010) ("Motion to Withdraw").

   Motion to Withdraw at 2, P: 4.

   Motion to Withdraw at 2, P: 7.

   Motion to Withdraw at 2, P: 6.

                                  Federal Communications Commission DA 10-629

   2

                                  Federal Communications Commission DA 10-629