Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-00155/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-00155-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

TSYS Acquiring Solutions, LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Electronic Payment Systems, LLC, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-09-00155-PHX-JAT

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Defendant Electronic Payment Systems, LLC’s Motion

for Reconsideration. (Doc. # 104.) Pursuant to the Court’s order, TSYS responded to the

Motion. (Doc. # 107.) Upon review of its January 28, 2011 Order, the Court is now aware

of an inconsistency in its language on page six of that Order that eroded the purpose and

effect of the Order, and was contrary to the to the intent of the Arbitrator’s Award. In

granting the Motion for Reconsideration, the Court is removing a statement that may have

had an unintended effect on the compliance ordered by the Court.

The Court has reviewed and carefully considered the arguments presented by TSYS,

particularly with respect to the issues concerning TSYS’s petition to the Federal

Communications Commission. However, the Court is not persuaded by TSYS’s arguments.

TSYS continues to ignore the role of this Court, which is to enforce the Arbitrator’s Award.

TSYS continues to raise issues and arguments that should have been presented during the

Case 2:09-cv-00155-JAT Document 108 Filed 02/15/11 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

arbitration, but were not, and now are not properly before the Court. The Order granting

EPS’s motion to compel (Doc. # 102) provided that if TSYS has not transferred its interest

in the 1-800 number or numbers within 90 days, then the Court will conduct a contempt

hearing. Therefore, TSYS’s request for an evidentiary hearing is denied. The contempt

hearing, if necessary, will provide TSYS with the opportunity to purge itself of a contempt

finding, and TSYS can present evidence at that time.

Accordingly, the Court will grant the Motion to Reconsider, and revise its prior Order

as follows:

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant Electronic Payment Systems, LLC’s Motion for

Reconsideration (Doc. # 104) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the effective date of the Order, dated January 28,

2011 (Doc. # 102), deemed to be February 15, 2011.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the final paragraph on page six of the Order,

dated January 28, 2011 (Doc. # 102), is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following

paragraph:

TSYS is not required to transfer the seven 1-800 numbers to EPS

“while those seven numbers are still being used by hundreds of thousands of

non-EPS merchants.” (Doc. # 91 at p. 6) (emphasis omitted). The Arbitrator’s

Award gives TSYS latitude to transfer non-EPS merchants to other 1-800

numbers, but this provision does not diminish the obligation of TSYS to move

with rapidity to fulfill the orders of the Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that TSYS’s request for an evidentiary hearing is

DENIED.

DATED this 15th day of February, 2011.

Case 2:09-cv-00155-JAT Document 108 Filed 02/15/11 Page 2 of 2