We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search

7 results found

Article

Arent Fox LLP | USA | 25 Oct 2010

In the courts

On October 19, 2010, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied the petition of Apple and AT&T Mobility for permission to appeal the Northern District of California's certification of a plaintiff's class against them.

Article

Arent Fox LLP | USA | 7 Sep 2010

Telecom privacy news

The US Second Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed with the US District Court for the District of Connecticut that using an iPhone to record a conversation, when such recording is not for an otherwise tortious or criminal act, does not violate the Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510.

Article

Arent Fox LLP | USA | 7 Sep 2010

Developments in intercarrier compensation

On September 1, 2010, the Idaho Public Utilities Commission reaffirmed its February 2010 order denying Time Warner Cable Information Services, LLC a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN).

Article

Arent Fox LLP | USA | 5 Jul 2010

Developments in intercarrier compensation

On June 30, 2010, an administrative law judge at the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) tentatively consolidated four access cases brought by Pac-West Telecomm, Inc. against wireless carriers Sprint Spectrum, L.P. and its affiliates, Cricket Communications, Inc., T-Mobile West Corp., and Verizon Wireless and its affiliates.

Article

Arent Fox LLP | USA | 7 Jun 2010

Developments in intercarrier compensation

On June 3, 2010, the California Public Utilities Commission voted to dismiss, without prejudice, a petition filed by North County Communications Corp. to establish rates for the termination of intraMTA commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) traffic.

Article

Arent Fox LLP | USA | 31 May 2010

In the courts

On May 24, 2010, the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona denied North County Communications’ motion for reconsideration of the court’s April 30, 2010 order dismissing its intercarrier compensation collection action against various CLECs, without prejudice, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and because the Arizona Corporation Commission has primary jurisdiction.

Article

Arent Fox LLP | USA | 10 May 2010

In the courts

On May 3, 2010, the United States District Court for the District of Arizona dismissed, without prejudice, a suit by North County Communications seeking tariffed charges for terminating traffic received from CLECs McLeod USA Telecommunications Services, Cox Arizona Telcom, and Electric Lightwave.

Previous page 1 Next page