Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

10-313 Talk America, Inc., v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co.

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//June 9, 2011//

10-313 Talk America, Inc., v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co.

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//June 9, 2011//

Listen to this article

Telecommunications
Entrance facilities

To satisfy its duty under 47 U.S.C. 251(c)(2), an incumbent LEC must make its existing entrance facilities available to competitors at cost-based rates if the facilities are to be used for interconnection.

Contrary to AT&T’s arguments, the FCC’s interpretation is not “plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation[s].” Auer v. Robbins, 519 U. S. 452, 461. First, it is perfectly sensible to read the FCC’s regulations to include entrance facilities as part of incumbent LECs’ networks. Second, the FCC’s views do not conflict with 47 CFR §51.5’s definition of interconnection as “the linking of two networks for the mutual exchange of traffic[, but not] the transport and termination of traffic.”

597 F. 3d 370, reversed.

Local effect: The opinion is consistent with Seventh Circuit precedent, Illinois Tell Tel. Co. v. Box, 526 F.3d 1069 (7th Cir.2008).

10-313 Talk America, Inc., v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co.

Thomas, J., Scalia, J., concurring.

Full Text

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests