• On May 13, 2011, several wireless carriers filed a joint response opposing the Pac-West Telecomm, Inc. Application for Rehearing of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) decision dismissing Pac-West’s complaints against several wireless carriers without prejudice. The complaints against Sprint Spectrum, L.P., Cricket Communications, Inc., T-Mobile West Corp., and Verizon Wireless asked the CPUC to set a rate for Pac-West’s termination of the intrastate, intraMTA traffic in the wake of the FCC’s decision in North County v. MetroPCS, which held that state commissions, and the not the FCC, are the appropriate tribunals for setting these rates. The CPUC, however, dismissed Pac-West’s complaints without prejudice while the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals considered MetroPCS’s appeal of North County. On May 17, 2011, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the North County order, thus removing the basis for the dismissals (see In the Courts). Docket Nos. 09-12-014, 10-01-019, 10-01-020, and 10-01-021.
  • On May 16, 2011, AT&T Texas and Sprint PCS filed a joint motion to dismiss AT&T’s October 2009 at the Public Utility Commission of Texas after the parties reached a settlement agreement. AT&T had alleged that Sprint was seeking to avoid the payment of access charges by deliberately routing interMTA wireless traffic over local trunks. AT&T also alleged that Sprint failed to update the billing factor used to measure this traffic. This case has been stayed since January 2010 to allow the parties time to negotiate the settlement, the terms of which were not disclosed. Docket No. 37610. This is the second access case settlement that AT&T has executed recently – in last week’s edition we reported its settlement with Sprint and Nextel in Indiana.