**Before the**

**FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

APCC Services, Inc., )

Data Net Systems, LLC, )

Davel Communications, Inc., )

Jaroth, Inc. dba Pacific Telemanagement )

Services, and )

Intera Communications Corp., )

> )

Complainants, )

> )

v\. ) File No. EB-02-MD-014

> )

Vertex Group d/b/a Premiere Telemedia, Inc., )

> )

Defendant. )

**ORDER**

**Adopted: November 21, 2002 Released: November 22, 2002**

By the Deputy Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division, Enforcement
Bureau:

1.  On April 19, 2002, APCC Services, Inc., *et al*. ("APCC" or
    "Complainants"), filed with this Commission a formal complaint
    against Vertex Group d/b/a Premiere Telemedia, Inc. ("Vertex")
    pursuant to section 208 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended (the "Act").[^1] The complaint alleges that Vertex failed to
    pay dial-around compensation to Complainants for certain categories
    of completed coinless calls originating from payphones, in violation
    of Commission rules and orders.[^2] Due to a series of extensions,
    the Defendant filed its answer in this proceeding on September 19,
    2002.[^3]

2.  During a telephone conference held on approximately September 20,
    2002, the parties indicated that they were engaged in ongoing
    settlement negotiations, and that there was a significant likelihood
    of settlement. To facilitate these ongoing negotiations,
    Complainants requested an extension of time by which they had to
    file their reply, to October 16, 2002. The Complainants formalized
    this request in a letter dated September 23, 2002, in which they
    stated that the additional time would enable the parties to exchange
    and analyze additional call data, which would hopefully allow the
    parties to settle the dispute.[^4] This request was granted by the
    Chief of the Market Disputes Resolution Division of the Enforcement
    Bureau on September 24, 2002. On October 11, 2002, the parties
    jointly made another similar request for extension of time for the
    Complainants to file their reply.[^5] The parties repeated that they
    were continuing to engage in active settlement negotiations, and
    that the additional time "will foster the parties' efforts at an
    expeditious settlement."[^6] This request was also granted.[^7] A
    status conference was later scheduled for November 13, 2002.[^8]

3.  On November 7, 2002, Complainants and Vertex filed a joint motion
    requesting that we dismiss the formal complaint in this proceeding
    with prejudice.[^9] We grant Complainant's motion to dismiss the
    complaint, with prejudice. We find that dismissal at this stage is
    appropriate, and will serve the public interest by promoting the
    private resolution of disputes and eliminating the expenditure of
    further time and resources of the parties and of the Commission.

4.  Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 208
    and 276 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§
    151, 154(i), 154(j), 208, and 276, sections 1.720-1.736 and
    64.1300-64.1320 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.720-1.736,
    64.1300-64.1320, and the authority delegated by sections 0.111 and
    0.311 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311, that the
    above-captioned complaint IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE in its
    entirety and the proceeding IS TERMINATED.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Radhika V. Karmarkar

Deputy Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division

Enforcement Bureau

[^1]: ^?^ 47 U.S.C. § 208.

[^2]: ^?^ *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 64.1300-64.1320. These rules were
    promulgated to implement section 276 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 276.

[^3]: *See APCC Services, Inc., et al., v. Vertex Group*, Vertex Group's
    Answer to Formal Complaint, File No. EB-02-MD-014.

[^4]: *APCC Services, Inc., et al., v. Vertex Group*, Letter from
    Jeffrey H. Tignor, Counsel for Complainants, and Lawrence M.
    Brenton, Counsel for Defendant, to Warren Firschein, Attorney,
    Market Disputes Resolution Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, File
    No. EB-02-MD-014 (dated September 23, 2002).

[^5]: ^?^ *APCC Services, Inc., et al., v. Vertex Group*, Letter from
    Jeffrey H. Tignor, Counsel for Complainants, and Lawrence M.
    Brenton, Counsel for Defendant, to Warren Firschein, Attorney,
    Market Disputes Resolution Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, File
    No. EB-02-MD-014 (dated October 11, 2002).

[^6]: ^?^ *Id.*

[^7]: ^?^ *See APCC Services, Inc., et al., v. Vertex Group*, Letter
    from Warren Firschein, Attorney, Market Disputes Resolution
    Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, to Allan C. Hubbard, Counsel for
    Complainants, and Lawrence M. Brenton, Counsel for Defendant, File
    No. EB-02-MD-014 (October 15, 2002).

[^8]: ^?^ *See APCC Services, Inc., et al., v. Vertex Group*, Letter
    from Warren Firschein, Attorney, Market Disputes Resolution
    Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, to Allan C. Hubbard, Counsel for
    Complainants, and Lawrence M. Brenton, Counsel for Defendant, File
    No. EB-02-MD-014 (October 23, 2002).

[^9]: ^?^ *APCC Services, Inc., et al., v. Vertex Group*, Joint Motion
    to Dismiss Formal Complaint With Prejudice, File No. EB-02-MD-014
    (filed November 7, 2002).