Communications Litigation Today was a service of Warren Communications News.

Incompas/Sprint Oppose, ILECs Back FCC Request for 8th Circuit Stay of BDS Ruling Mandate

Incompas and Sprint asked a court to deny an FCC motion to stay the mandate of the court's partial reversal of a commission order largely deregulating price-cap incumbent telco business data services (see 1810100054). Intervenors USTelecom, AT&T and CenturyLink supported the motion. The commission "fails to articulate any standard for the stay that it seeks," said Incompas/Sprint opposition Monday to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Citizens Telecommunications v. FCC, No. 17-2296. "It likewise fails to identify any timeframe for the stay requested, stating only that the Commission 'proposes to file status updates every 90 days to apprise the Court of developments in the agency’s rulemaking.'" The FCC said an indefinite stay is justified because "the agency is diligently working to address this Court's remand, and there is every reason to believe [it will] proceed efficiently to adopt a new TDM transport rule," the opposition noted. But that isn't the Supreme Court's standard, which requires "extraordinary circumstances" or, when a cert petition is pending, "good cause," Incompas and Sprint said. The ILECs, noting the new rules took effect in August 2017, said a "stay is necessary to prevent pointless and costly industry disruption as the FCC moves forward expeditiously ... to re-adopt on remand the same transport rule in effect." If the court issues the mandate "vacating the 2017 transport rule before the remand proceedings are complete," carriers must "file thousands of pages of new federal tariffs," the intervenors said. "Carriers would also have to puzzle through how to apply the resulting regime, a bizarre regulatory hybrid with conflicting geographic units and jumbled service baskets, in which transport is subject to legacy pre-2017 regulations while interrelated, non-transport data services are subject to the new, lighter-touch regime that this Court has upheld."