Interconnection to facilities of local exchange carriers

CurrencyCurrent through May 31, 2023
Citation 47 C.F.R. §20.11
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
25 cases
  • Sw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Fitch
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Southern District of Texas
    • July 22, 2011
    ...11 F.C.C.R. 15,499, ¶ 1023 (Aug. 8, 1996), reversed on other grounds, AT&T Corp. v. Iowa Utils. Bd., 525 U.S. 366 (1999); see also 47 C.F.R. § 20.11(e). 4. Deposition of F. Cary Fitch, Exh. G to AT&T Texas's Motion [Doc. # 42] ("Fitch Depo."), at 110. 5. See Excerpts from PUCT Arbitration A......
  • Big Bend Tel. Co. v. Halo Wireless, Inc. (In re Halo Wireless, Inc.), Cause No. A–11–CV–721–LY.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Western District of Texas
    • February 15, 2012
    ...in filing their petition before the PUC, failed to comply with required procedures for establishing interconnection agreements. See47 C.F.R. § 20.11(e). Halo removed this case under the bankruptcy removal statute, which provides for removal of claims related to bankruptcy cases wherein the ......
  • New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC v. Finley
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • March 15, 2012
    ...Act.” See Developing a Unified Intercarrier Compensation Regime, 20 FCC Rcd. 4855, 4864–65 ¶¶ 15–16, 2005 WL 433200 (2005); see also 47 C.F.R. § 20.11(e). Without interconnection, “customers of different LECs in the same local calling area would not be able to call each other.” 3 MCImetro, ......
  • W. Radio Servs. Co. v. Qwest Corp., 10–35820.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • March 15, 2012
    ...received a qualifying “request for negotiation.” This is true whether the party seeking arbitration is an ILEC or a competing CMRS. See47 C.F.R. § 20.11(e).B. Western's two petitions for arbitration In this case, Western petitioned the PUC for arbitration twice. The first petition, on March......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT