Great Lakes Commc'n Corp. v. At&T Corp.

• Decision Date: 24 June 2014
• Docket Number: No. C13-4117-DEO,C13-4117-DEO
• Parties: GREAT LAKES COMMUNICATION CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. AT&T CORP., Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa

GREAT LAKES COMMUNICATION CORPORATION, Plaintiff,
v.
AT&T CORP., Defendant.

No. C13-4117-DEO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA WESTERN DIVISION

DATED: June 24, 2014

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................3

II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY...............................................................3

III. REGULATORY BACKGROUND........................................................4

IV. GLCC'S COMPLAINT..................................................................10

V. AT&T's COUNTERCLAIM............................................................11

VI. THE MOTION TO DISMISS..........................................................11

A. Applicable Standards.............................................................12
B. Analysis.............................................................................13

1. Standing....................................................................13
2. Counterclaim Count I...................................................15

a. Overview...........................................................15
b. Summary of the Arguments....................................16
c. Discussion.........................................................18

i. Has AT&T Alleged That No Fees Are Being Paid?.......................................................18
ii. Is The Allegation Plausible?...........................19

3. Counterclaim Count II ..................................................22

a. Overview ........................................................... 22

Page 2

b. Summary of the Arguments.................................... 23
c. Discussion ......................................................... 24

4. Counterclaim Count III................................................. 28

a. Overview ........................................................... 28
b. Summary of the Arguments.................................... 28
c. Discussion ......................................................... 29

VII. THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT....................................33

A. Applicable Standards.............................................................33
B. Undisputed Facts.................................................................35
C. Summary of the Arguments....................................................37
D. Discussion..........................................................................38

1. Is There a Genuine Issue of Material Fact as to Whether AT&T is a Buyer Under the Tariff and, Therefore, Subject to its Billing Dispute Requirements?.......................38
2. If AT&T is a Buyer, is GLCC Entitled to Summary Judgment Based on AT&T's Failure To Comply With the Tariff's Billing Dispute Requirements?..............................40

a. Notice Requirements ............................................41
b. Payment Requirement...........................................44

VIII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION.......................................46

Page 3

I. INTRODUCTION

This case is before me on plaintiff's motion (Doc. No. 17) to dismiss and for summary judgment. Defendant has filed a resistance (Doc. No. 20) and plaintiff has filed a reply (Doc. No. 24). The Honorable Donald E. O'Brien, Senior United States District Judge, has referred the motion to me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) to conduct any necessary hearings and to issue a report and recommendation. See Doc. No. 27. I heard oral arguments on May 29, 2014. Attorneys Jeana Goosmann, David Carter and Joseph Bowser appeared for plaintiff. Attorneys Richard Lozier and Michael Hunseder appeared for defendant. The motion is now fully submitted.

II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiff Great Lakes Communication Corporation (GLCC) commenced this action against defendant AT&T Corp. (AT&T) on December 18, 2013. GLCC's complaint (Doc. No. 1) asserts various causes of action through which it seeks to recover payments allegedly owed to it by AT&T. GLCC also seeks declaratory relief.

GLCC alleges that it is an Iowa corporation that operates as a local exchange carrier (LEC), meaning it "provides interstate and intrastate exchange access service, as well as local, long distance and enhanced services to residential and business telecommunications customers." Doc. No. 1 at ¶ 4. GLCC contends AT&T is a New York corporation that operates as an interexchange carrier (IXC) and is a common carrier subject to the provisions of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 151 et seq. (the Act). Id. ¶¶ 5-6. GLCC alleges subject matter jurisdiction via both federal-question and diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. Id. at ¶ 7-8. It further alleges supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367. Id. at ¶ 9.

Page 4

On January 31, 2014, AT&T filed an answer and counterclaim (Doc. No. 11). On March 3, 2014, GLCC filed its pending motion to dismiss and for summary judgment. GLCC seeks entry of an order (a) dismissing AT&T's counterclaims pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and (b) holding AT&T liable to GLCC as a matter of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56.

III. REGULATORY BACKGROUND

Overview of intercarrier compensation. Telephone calls often involve multiple service providers. When more than one provider is involved, arrangements must be made for those providers to obtain compensation for their respective roles. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) oversees and governs this process with regard to telecommunications services that cross state lines. Services that occur entirely within a state are governed by that state's applicable regulatory agency which, in Iowa, is the Iowa Utilities Board (IUB).

Switched access service...