• On January 18, 2013, the Maryland Public Service Commission (MD PSC) closed a complaint proceeding initiated by AT&T Communications of Maryland, LLC against YMax Communications Corp., because YMax agreed to withdraw its proposed tariff revisions that led to the dispute. AT&T filed its complaint on May 18, 2012, alleging that YMax’s tariff revisions do not comply with the FCC’s Intercarrier Compensation/Universal Service Reform Order (FCC 11-161) regarding VoIP-PSTN traffic. AT&T argued that YMax’s tariff would allow it to bill interexchange carriers for switching and transport functions provided by LECs other than YMax, although the FCC’s rules state that “[t]his rule does not permit a local exchange carrier to charge for functions not performed by the local exchange carrier itself or the affiliate or unaffiliated provider of interconnected VoIP service.” 47 C.F.R. § 51.913(b). An MD PSC administrative law judge (ALJ) largely agreed with AT&T, and issued a proposed decision recommending that YMax’s proposed tariff definitions be rejected. In particular, the ALJ ruled that YMax’s definition of “end office switch” in its proposed tariff “omits the essential elements prescribed by the FCC’s regulations that permit YMax to assess charges for ‘end office switched access’ using its facilities that are interconnected to the PSTN.” YMax appealed the ALJ’s decision, asserting that its proposed tariff language complies with the FCC’s regulations, because it reflects the “functionally equivalent” service YMax claims to provide. But on December 26, 2012, YMax informed the MPSC that it intended to withdraw its proposed tariff revisions. On that basis, the MD PSC dismissed AT&T’s complaint as moot. Docket No. 9295.