Qwest Commc'ns Co. v. Aventure Commc'ns Tech., LLC
| Citation | 86 F.Supp.3d 933 |
| Decision Date | 17 February 2015 |
| Docket Number | No. 4:07–cv–00078–JEG.,4:07–cv–00078–JEG. |
| Parties | QWEST COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, v. AVENTURE COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY, LLC; Dixon Telephone Company; Reasnor Telephone Company, LLC, Audiocom, LLC; Free Conferencing Corporation; Futurephone.Com, LLC; and Hometown Telecom, Inc; Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs. |
| Court | United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States State District Court of Southern District of Iowa |
86 F.Supp.3d 933
QWEST COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant
v.
AVENTURE COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY, LLC; Dixon Telephone Company; Reasnor Telephone Company, LLC, Audiocom, LLC; Free Conferencing Corporation; Futurephone.Com, LLC; and Hometown Telecom, Inc; Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs.
No. 4:07–cv–00078–JEG.
United States District Court, S.D. Iowa, Central Division.
Signed Feb. 17, 2015.
Charles W. Steese, Sandra L. Potter, Armstrong Teasdale LLP, Phillip L. Douglass, Steese & Evans, P.C., Denver, CO, David S. Sather, Richard W. Lozier, Jr., Belin McCormick, P.C., Des Moines, IA, for Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant.
Steven L. Nelson, Robert F Holz, Jr., Davis Brown Law Firm, Kris Holub Tilley, Thomas George Fisher, Jr., Des Moines City Attorney, Davis, Brown, Koehn, Shors & Roberts, PC, Des Moines, IA, Matthew Alexander Henry, William Scott McCollough, McCollough Henry, PC, West Lake Hills, TX, David J. Hellstern, Sullivan & Ward PC, West Des Moines, IA, Gary M. Joye, Maxwell M. Blecher, Blecher Collins Pepperman & Joye, P.C., Los Angeles, CA, Paul D. Lundberg, Lundberg Law Firm, Sioux City, IA, Larry D. Espel, Greene Espel PLLP, Minneapolis, MN, R. Bruce Beckner, Garvey Schubert Barer, Washington, DC, Scott R. Swier, Swier Law Firm, Prof. LLC, Avon, SD, for Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs.
ORDER
JAMES E. GRITZNER, Chief Judge.
| TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|---|
| I. | INTRODUCTION | 939 |
| II. | JURISDICTION | 940 |
| III. | BACKGROUND | 941 |
| A. | Telecommunication Regulatory Backdrop | 941 |
| 1. | Communications Act of 1934 | 941 |
| 2. | Anti–trust Litigation | 942 |
| 3. | Telecommunications Act of 1996 | 943 |
| 4. | The Act: IXCs, ILECs, and CLECs | 943 |
| 5. | Relevant Provisions of the Act | 945 |
| B. | “Traffic Pumping” Litigation | 947 |
| 1. | Farmers v. Qwest | 947 |
| a. | FCC: Farmers I | 948 |
| b. | FCC: Farmers Reconsideration I | 949 |
| c. | FCC: Farmers II | 950 |
| d. | FCC: Farmers Reconsideration II | 953 |
| e. | D.C. Circuit: Farmers & Merchants v. FCC | 953 |
| 2. | FCC: All American Tel. Co. v. AT & T Corp. | 954 |
| a. | FCC: All American I | 954 |
| b. | FCC: All American Reconsideration I | 956 |
| c. | FCC: All American II | 956 |
| d. | FCC: All American Reconsideration II | 959 |
| 3. | FCC: AT & T v. YMax | 960 |
| 4. | Northern Valley Cases | 963 |
| a. | FCC: Qwest v. Northern Valley (N. Valley I) | 963 |
| b. | FCC: N. Valley Reconsideration I | 965 |
| c. | FCC: Sprint v. Northern Valley (N. Valley II) | 966 |
| d. | FCC: N. Valley Reconsideration II | 967 |
| e. | D.C. Circuit: N. Valley v. FCC | 967 |
| 5. | Sancom and Splitrock Cases | 967 |
| a. | FCC: Qwest v. Sancom (Sancom I) | 968 |
| b. | FCC: Sancom Reconsideration I | 971 |
| c. | Qwest v. Free Conferencing 4:07–cv–04147 (D.S.D.) | 971 |
| 6. | Tekstar Cases | 972 |
| 7. |
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
All Am. Tel. Co. v. AT & T Corp.
...authority supporting AT & T's argument that [the CLEC's] state law claims must be denied"); Qwest Commc'ns Co. v. Aventure Commc'ns Techs., LLC, 86 F.Supp.3d 933, 1026 (S.D. Iowa 2015) ("It defies credulity that the LECs continue to maintain, despite consideration of these very traffic pump......
-
All Am. Tel. Co. v. At&T Corp., 07cv861
...authority supporting AT&T's argument that [the CLEC's] state law claims must be denied"); Qwest Commc'ns Co. v. Aventure Commc'ns Techs., LLC , 86 F. Supp. 3d 933, 1026 (S.D. Iowa 2015) ("It defies credulity that the LECs continue to maintain, despite consideration of these very traffic pum......
-
Sprint Commc'ns Co. v. Crow Creek Sioux Tribal Court, 4:10–CV–04110–KES.
...... See In the Matter of Qwest Commc'ns Corp. v. Farmers & Merchs. Mut. Tele. Co., 22 FCC ... Qwest Commcn's Co. v. Aventure Commcn's, 86 F.Supp.3d 933, 998, 2015 WL 711154 at *55 ......
-
Farris v. Am. Med. Sys., Inc.
...). Second, courts draw any reasonable inferences that may be drawn in favor of the non-movant. Qwest Commc'ns Co. v. Aventure Commc'ns Tech., LLC , 86 F.Supp.3d 933, 994 (S.D. Iowa 2015). Next, they read the complaint as a whole, without viewing each allegation in isolation. Braden , 588 F.......