Opinion ID: 3065449
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: the number of calls and the number of minutes

Text: originating on the Defendants’ networks and terminated on [North County’s] network from April 29, 2005 up through the time of trial, (2) that [North County] is entitled to receive mutual compensation for the termination of calls to [North County’s] endusers which originate on the Defendants’ networks, and (3) that the Defendants are required to commit to compensate [North County] at a rate to be deter- mined by the appropriate regulatory body, or else refrain from sending any traffic to [North County’s] end-users and refrain from taxing [North County’s] 2430 NORTH COUNTY COMM. v. CELLCO. limited resources, (4) that the Defendants’ conduct amounts to an unjust and unreasonable practice in violation of section 201 and 202 of the Federal Communications Act (47 U.S.C. §§ 201, 202) which has damaged [North County] (47 U.S.C. §§ 206, 207). North County’s second cause of action is premised on quantum meruit. North County alleged that “Defendants knowingly accepted, used, enjoyed and benefitted from the services provided by [North County].” According to North County, “[i]t would be unjust to allow the Defendants to have the benefit of [North County’s] services without paying reasonable compensation for these benefits and the Defendants should be so ordered to pay.” North County sought damages “covering the period beginning April 29, 2005 and continuing up through the time of trial.” In its third cause of action, North County asserted damages pursuant to the applicable tariff “covering the period beginning 3 years before the filing of this complaint and continuing up to and including April 28, 2005.” The district court granted defendant-appellees’ motion to dismiss, holding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction, because North County failed to properly allege a federal claim. The district court also concluded that declaratory judgment “would not achieve the objectives of granting such relief.” North County filed a timely notice of appeal.