Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/321207804/Central-Telephone-Company-of-VA-v-Sprint-Communications-Company-4th-Cir-2013
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 10:08:18+00:00

Document:
Affirmed by published opinion. Judge Duncan wrote the opinion, in which Judge Niemeyer and Judge Floyd joined.
FIGEL, PLLC, Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae Verizon. Peter Karanjia, Deputy General Counsel, Jacob M.
Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae Federal Communications Commission.
brought a breach of contract claim in federal district court.
procedural history of the appeal before us.
then formed a separate company known as Embarq Corporation ("Embarq"). In July 2009, CenturyTel, Inc.
resulting entity began doing business as "CenturyLink."
We distinguish between Sprint (or the Sprint Defendants), the defendant in this case, and Sprint Corporation, of which the former is a part.
provides context for our discussion of the issues in this case.
suggests, relies on the internet to originate voice communications. See Vonage Holdings Corp. v. Nebraska Pub. Serv.
and long distance interstate. The facts giving rise to the underlying dispute revolve around the ICAs compensation structure for these three categories of traffic.
simply as "the ICA," and, when discussing the ICA, we look to the provisions of the Virginia ICA found in the J.A. at 710-86.
do not necessarily follow existing state, province, or area code borders.
A long distance intrastate call originates and terminates within the borders of a state, but travels from one LATA to another.
A carrier "terminates" a call by routing it from another carrier to a customer in its own network.
charge depends on the category of long distance traffic.
be terminated on one of CenturyLinks local networks.
another carrier. See 47 C.F.R. 69.2(a). The FCC defines "access charge"
shall be compensated in the same manner as voice traffic (e.g.
point, Sprint began filing written disputes with CenturyLink.
improperly high rate for VoIP traffic since May 1, 2007.
Sprint deemed to be in excess of what it should have paid.
although no dispute concerning the latter existed.
describe in the next section, concerns whether certain VoIP traffic is properly deemed local or long distance.
local traffic not subject to access charges.
a court to refer a case within its jurisdiction to an administrative agency.
breach of contract claim during August and September 2010.
jurisdictional endpoints of the calls." Cent. Tel. Co. of Va. v.
court then awarded CenturyLink $23,376,213.76, which consisted of damages under the breach of contract claim and prejudgment interest.
unique account number that is assigned to a specific facility.
the call as local traffic, reciprocal compensation charges apply.
the singular drafter. . . ." Cent. Tel. Co. of Va., 759 F. Supp. 2d at 804.
Sprint does not challenge this factual finding on appeal.
Sprints counterclaim, and discuss them in more detail infra in III.B.
the software in place to use the CPN method. See J.A. 490-91.
against Sprint as the drafter.
("IRA") during the time he presided over this case.
confusion, we refer to "CenturyLink shares" throughout.
to identify potential conflicts did not register any conflict. J.A.
case reassigned to some other judge to make a decision." J.A.
recusal and vacatur issues before the judge took any action.
and, if desired, file a brief.
statements rested on a misinterpretation of the ethical rules.
was done on May 17, 2011.
the merits of Sprints counterclaim.
requested the FCC to submit an amicus brief.12 We incorporate the FCCs views in our discussion as appropriate.
we briefly describe pertinent parts of the 1996 Act.
requirements of section 251 of this title and this section."
arguments raise legal questions, which we review de novo.
316, 322 (4th Cir. 2002). We begin with the former.
reviewing initial determinations made by State commissions.
Cir. 2003) (en banc); MCI Telecomms. Corp. v. Ill. Bell Tel.
Co., 222 F.3d 323, 33738 (7th Cir. 2000); Sw. Bell Tel. Co.
Commcns, LLC, 15 F.C.C.R. 11277, 11280 (F.C.C. 2000).
Although the Ninth Circuit in Pacific Bell v. Pac-West Telecomm, Inc.
that a State commission must interpret an ICA before a federal district court can do so.
commissions failure to act." (emphasis added)). But Congress did not do so.
authority to interpret the ICA. See dPi Teleconnect LLC v. Owens, 413 F.
Appx 641, 644-45 (4th Cir. 2011).
approval process for an ICA.
ICA. See e.g., Bellsouth Telecomms., 317 F.3d at 1277; Sw.
Act requires a State commission to interpret an ICA in the first instance.
intended to mandate initial State commission consideration.
Nor does Sprints vague appeal to "cooperative federalism"
instance in a State commission.
v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. 120, 132 (2000); Chevron v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 843-44 (1984).
[ICAs]." Starpower, 15 F.C.C.R. at 11280 (emphasis added).
instance. Core Commcns, 493 F.3d at 342.
the  Act confer on the FCC and federal district courts."
accord Chevron deference to a position the FCC did not take.
a position on the merits of the dispute between Sprint and CenturyLink.
countervailing institutional interests favoring exhaustion,"
omitted). Here, that balance tips against imposing an exhaustion requirement.
in part to promote efficiency. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S.
deference to State commissions in the first instance.
Vision, Inc., 650 F.3d 423, 432 (4th Cir. 2011).
had a "financial interest in . . . a party to the proceeding."
of 455(b)(4). Shell Oil, 672 F.3d at 1289.
recusal across a broad range of cases. See New York City Dev.
mutual fund." Id. (citation omitted).
diversification" and a "reduction of administrative expenses,"
the fund managers without input from the presiding judge."
value of the funds assets.").
of the IRA so as to remove the protection of 455(d)(4)(i)s safe harbor.
from CenturyLink shortly thereafter further supports this conclusion.
and therefore did not abuse his discretion in deciding that neither recusal nor vacatur was appropriate.
No. 96 Pension Plan v. Pepper, 663 F.3d 210, 215 (4th Cir.
that the plaintiff incurred damages as a result of the breach.
Station Assocs., Inc. v. Dare Cnty., 501 S.E.2d 705, 708 (N.C.
Ct. App. 1998) revd on other grounds, 513 S.E.2d 789 (N.C.
to the construction of the instrument by the parties themselves." (citation omitted)); Century Commcns, Inc. v. Hous.
with these principles, we turn to Sprints arguments.
applied that existing compensation regime to VoIP traffic.
On appeal, instead of directly challenging this interpretation of the ICA, Sprint argues that the ICAs "plain language"
and Sprint for the local interconnection of their networks,"
excludes long distance VoIP traffic carried over FGD trunks.
to local networks. See Appellants Br. at 37 (quoting J.A. 86).
561 S.E.2d 663, 667 (Va. 2002).
to apply to VoIP traffic carried over FGD trunks.
would seem to counsel in favor of, not against, it.
method instead of the BTN method it actually used.
defines local traffic under the NC ICA as traffic "that is originated and terminated within Sprints local calling area." J.A.
necessary for each Party to generate bills to the other Party."
industry standard for message recording." J.A. 792. The parties do not dispute that the industry manual known as the Telcordia GR-1100-CORE permits use of the BTN method.
CenturyLink to use the Calling Party Number or "CPN"
method. The district court credited the latter view. So do we.
CenturyLink adopt this method at any point in the future.
and in favor of CenturyLink.

References: v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 

v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.