On September 4, 2012, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Sprint’s appeal of the Southern District of Iowa’s decision to abstain from hearing Sprint’s challenge to an Iowa Utilities Board ruling that Sprint owed Windstream’s intrastate access charges on VoIP calls. Despite paying Windstream’s access charges for VoIP traffic for years, Sprint decided to cease paying them, and filed a case with the IUB asking it to approve its non-payment. The IUB held that Sprint owed the access charges. Sprint appealed that decision to the appropriate Iowa state court. On the same day that it filed its state court appeal, Sprint also filed a lawsuit in federal court against the IUB, asking that court to enjoin the IUB’s order. The federal district court dismissed Sprint’s complaint on abstention grounds, finding that it should not interfere with the ongoing state proceedings. The appeals court agreed: “Interests of comity and federalism support federal abstention where state judicial review of the IUB’s order has not yet been completed.” It also dismissed Sprint’s argument that the state’s interest in the case was not sufficient to justify the federal court’s abstention: “Iowa has an important state interest in regulating and enforcing its intrastate utility rates.” The appeals court did agree with Sprint, however, that its case should have been stayed rather than dismissed in the event the parties need to return to federal court after the conclusion of the state court appeal. Sprint Commc’ns Co. v. Jacobs, No. 11-2984 (8th Cir.).