Western Radio Services Co. v. Qwest Corp.
678 F.3d 970
| 9th Cir. | 2012Background
- Western Radio and Qwest formed an ICA under the Telecommunications Act; the Oregon PUC arbitrated in 2004 and approved in 2005.
- Western alleged Qwest failed to negotiate in good faith under §251(c)(1).
- Western and Qwest/PUC actions were reviewed in federal court under §252(e)(6).
- Ninth Circuit previously held exhaustion prudentially required PUC addressing Western’s good-faith claim before suit.
- On remand, district court found the PUC orders did not address Western’s good-faith claim and dismissed; later, the ICA's compliance was upheld except for two issues (Issues 2 and 6).
- Ninth Circuit ultimately affirmed in part, reversed in part on Issues 2 and 6, and remanded for further PUC proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exhaustion of good-faith claim to the PUC before federal suit | Western submitted claim to PUC (Oct 2005 petition) | PUC did not decide merits; no new request for negotiation; second petition improper | Prudential exhaustion not satisfied; dismissal upheld |
| Interconnection at technically feasible point per LATA | Interconnect at a single POI per LATA suffices | Interconnect at least one POI per LATA required; no need to transport intra-LATA traffic across TANs | ICA compliant with single-POI-per-LATA requirement; affirmed |
| Signaling technology as requirement for interconnection | DTMF/Dial Pulse must be provided if technically feasible | Signaling methods are not 'methods of obtaining interconnection' and need not be blanket-provided | DTMF/Dial Pulse not a required interconnection method; ICA does not violate the Act |
| Reciprocal compensation for intra-MTA traffic when IXC involved | IXC involvement should not remove intra-MTA traffic from reciprocal compensation | IXC involvement justifies non-local classification under existing rules | Traffic within same MTA remains subject to reciprocal compensation; ICA's intra-MTA/IXC treatment violates the Act; remanded for proceedings consistent with the opinion |
Key Cases Cited
- W. Radio Servs. Co. v. Qwest Corp., 530 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir.2008) (prudential exhaustion and good-faith claim framework in this circuit)
- Talk Am., Inc. v. Mich. Bell Tel. Co., 131 S. Ct. 2254 (Sup. Ct. 2011) (interconnection and signaling treatment guidance in FCC context)
- MCImetro Access Transmission Servs., Inc. v. BellSouth Telecomm., Inc., 352 F.3d 872 (4th Cir.2003) (interconnection and transport concepts; one POI per LATA guidance)
- Atlas Telephone Co. v. Oklahoma Corp. Comm., 400 F.3d 1256 (10th Cir.2005) (reciprocal compensation despite IXC involvement; intra-MTA focus)
- Alma Commc'ns Co. v. Mo. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 490 F.3d 619 (8th Cir.2007) (reciprocal compensation for intra-MTA traffic with CMRS)