******************************************************** 
                      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

   Law Offices of Matthew Bergman, )

   Complainant, )

   )

   v. ) File No. EB-11-MD-005

   )

   Satcom Direct, Inc. and )

   Satcom Direct Communications, Inc., )

   Defendants. )

                               ORDER OF DISMISSAL

   Adopted: January 30, 2013 Released: January 30, 2013

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

    1. On June 20, 2011, the above-named complainant (Bergman) filed with
       this Commission an amended formal complaint (Complaint)^ against the
       above-named defendants, (collectively, Satcom) pursuant to section 208
       of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Act),^ and section
       1.720 et seq. of the Commission's rules.^ The Complaint alleges, inter
       alia, that Satcom's billing and marketing practices are unjust and
       unreasonable in violation of section 201(b) of the Act.^ On July 25,
       2011, Satcom filed an answer to the Complaint in which it denied
       Bergman's allegations.^

    2. On January 25, 2013, the parties jointly filed a motion to dismiss the
       Complaint.^ In the Motion, the parties state that they have resolved
       their dispute and request that the Complaint be dismissed with
       prejudice.^

    3. We are satisfied that granting the Motion will serve the public
       interest by promoting the private resolution of disputes and
       eliminating the need for further litigation and the expenditure of
       additional time and resources of the parties and this Commission.

    4. 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. SS 151,
       154(i), 154(j), and 208, and the authority  delegated in sections
       0.111, 0.311, and 1.720 - 1.736 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.
       SS 0.111, 0.311, and 1.720  -  1.736, that the Motion is GRANTED, and
       that the Complaint in this proceeding is DISMISSED with prejudice.

   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

   Lisa J. Saks

   Deputy Chief

   Market Disputes Resolution Division

   Enforcement Bureau

   ^ Amended Formal Complaint of Law Offices of Matthew Bergman, File No.
   EB-11-MD-005 (filed June 20, 2011). Bergman's original complaint was filed
   a few weeks earlier. See Formal Complaint of Law Offices of Matthew
   Bergman, File No. EB-11-MD-005 (filed May 5, 2011) (Complaint).

   ^ 47 U.S.C. S 208.

   ^ 47 C.F.R. SS 1.720 -1.736.

   ^ 47 U.S.C. S 201(b).

   ^ Answer to Formal Complaint of Law Offices of Matthew Bergman, File No.
   EB-11-MD-005 (filed July 25, 2011) (Answer).

   ^ Joint Motion To Dismiss, File No. EB-11-MD-005 (filed Jan. 25, 2013)
   (Motion).

   ^ Motion at 1.

   (...continued from previous page)

                                                              (continued....)

   Federal Communications Commission DA  13-118

                                       2

   Federal Communications Commission DA  13-118