T-Mobile USA, Inc. et al v. Armstrong et al, No. 3:2008cv00036 - Document 45 (E.D. Ky. 2009)

Court Description: JUDGMENT: 1. Judgment is entered in accordance with the Memorandum Opinion and Order entered on this date. More specifically, A. The Court finds and DECLARES that the Kentucky Public Service Commissions resolution of Issues 1 and 9 is inconsistent w ith 47 U.S.C. § 251(b)(5) and the requirement of FCC Rules and Decisions that a landline carrier pay reciprocal compensation to a wireless carrier for landline-originated traffic that terminates to a wireless carrier in the same Major Trading Ar ea, whether or not the call is also transported by an intermediary carrier. 47 C.F.R. § 51.701(b)(2) (2008).B. The Court finds and DECLARES that the Kentucky Public Service Commissions resolution of Issue 2 is not inconsistent with 47 U.S.C. 67; 251(a)(1) or the requirement of FCC Rules and Decisions that a landline carrier provide the type of interconnection reasonably requested by a wireless carrier to the extent that it determined thatthe use of one trunk for the traffic of all twelve RLECs was not economically reasonable. However, this issue is REMANDED to the Commission to provide factual support for its determination and/or choice of DS1 (or some other level of traffic) as the threshold level requiring a dedicated trunk line.C . The Court finds and DECLARES that the Kentucky Public Service Commissions resolution of Issues 5, 7 and 8 is inconsistent with 47 U.S.C. § 251(a)(1) and the requirement of FCC Rules and Decisions that the calling-partys network is required to pay the costs of transporting its traffic to the network of the terminating carrier. 47 C.F.R. § 51.703(b)(2008).D. As identified in arbitration proceedings 2006-00215, 2006-00217, 2006- 00218, 2006-00220, 2006-00252, 2006-00255, 2006-00288, 200 6-00292, 2006-00294, 2006- 00296, 2006-00298, and 2006-00300, the determinations of Issues 1, 5, 7, 8 and 9 by theKentucky Public Service Commission are hereby DECLARED unlawful and preempted by federal law as described above and in the Memorandum Op inion and Order entered this date. E. The Kentucky Public Service Commission is ENJOINED from attempting to enforce the preempted portions of the December 22, March 19, and June 18 Orders. 2. This is a FINAL and APPEALABLE Judgment and there is no just cause for delay. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 5/20/2009.(CBD)cc: COR

Download PDF

T-Mobile USA, Inc. et al v. Armstrong et al Doc. 45 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION (at Frankfort) T-MOBILE USA, INC., et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) V. ) ) DAVID ARMSTRONG, Chairman, ) JAMES W. GARDNER, Vice Chairman, ) JOHN W. CLAY, Commissioner, in their ) official capacities as Commissioners of the ) Kentucky Public Service Commission, et ) al., ) ) Defendants. ) *** *** Civil Action No. 3: 08-36-DCR JUDGMENT *** *** In accordance with the Memorandum Opinion and Order entered this date, and pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: 1. Judgment is entered in accordance with the Memorandum Opinion and Order entered on this date. More specifically, A. The Court finds and DECLARES that the Kentucky Public Service Commission’s resolution of Issues 1 and 9 is inconsistent with 47 U.S.C. § 251(b)(5) and the requirement of FCC Rules and Decisions that a landline carrier pay reciprocal compensation to a wireless carrier for landline-originated traffic that terminates to a wireless carrier in the same Major Trading Area, whether or not the call is also transported by an intermediary carrier. 47 C.F.R. § 51.701(b)(2) (2008). Dockets.Justia.com B. The Court finds and DECLARES that the Kentucky Public Service Commission’s resolution of Issue 2 is not inconsistent with 47 U.S.C. § 251(a)(1) or the requirement of FCC Rules and Decisions that a landline carrier provide the type of interconnection reasonably requested by a wireless carrier to the extent that it determined that the use of one trunk for the traffic of all twelve RLECs was not economically reasonable. However, this issue is REMANDED to the Commission to provide factual support for its determination and/or choice of DS1 (or some other level of traffic) as the threshold level requiring a dedicated trunk line. C. The Court finds and DECLARES that the Kentucky Public Service Commission’s resolution of Issues 5, 7 and 8 is inconsistent with 47 U.S.C. § 251(a)(1) and the requirement of FCC Rules and Decisions that the calling-party’s network is required to pay the costs of transporting its traffic to the network of the terminating carrier. 47 C.F.R. § 51.703(b)(2008). D. As identified in arbitration proceedings 2006-00215, 2006-00217, 2006- 00218, 2006-00220, 2006-00252, 2006-00255, 2006-00288, 2006-00292, 2006-00294, 200600296, 2006-00298, and 2006-00300, the determinations of Issues 1, 5, 7, 8 and 9 by the Kentucky Public Service Commission are hereby DECLARED unlawful and preempted by federal law as described above and in the Memorandum Opinion and Order entered this date. E. The Kentucky Public Service Commission is ENJOINED from attempting to enforce the preempted portions of the December 22, March 19, and June 18 Orders. 2. delay. This is a FINAL and APPEALABLE Judgment and there is no just cause for This 20th day of May, 2009.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.