While stating his belief that the Eleventh Circuit court erred in overturning a 2005 FCC order that preempted state regulation of line items on wireless phone bills, Solicitor General Paul Clement nevertheless recommended against Supreme Court review of the appeals court decision on grounds that the FCC may issue a new ruling on different grounds. Under Section 332(c) of the 1934 Communications Act, states are prohibited from regulating rates charged for commercial mobile services. In its “truth-in-billing” decision handed down in March 2005, the FCC decreed that state laws requiring or barring line items on wireless phone bill constitute rate regulation that is prohibited under Section 332(c). At the request of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, however, the Eleventh Circuit overturned the FCC ruling last year, concluding that, “the prohibition or requirement of a line item affects the presentation of the charge on the user’s bill, but does not affect the amount that a user is charged for the service.” Asserting that the appeals court “erred by not according appropriate deference to the FCC’s reasonable construction of Section 332(c),” the Solicitor General argued that because “a line item in a wireless bill causes a carrier to disaggregate or unbundle a component of service and associate a charge with it, regulation of line items directly implicates the carriers’ rate structure.” Noting, however, that proceedings are currently underway at the FCC that could provide the agency with other grounds for the preemption of state regulation of such line items, the Solicitor General said that the FCC’s 2005 decision “is not of sufficient continuing importance at present to warrant the court’s attention.”