*Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 24410.doc*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  03-  145 
 Before  the  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 
 In  the  Matter  of 
 MAP  Mobile  Communications,  Inc., 
 Complainant, 
 v. 
 MCI  WorldCom  Network  Services,  Inc.  and  MCI  WorldCom  Communications,  Inc., 


 Defendants. 


 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 )  ) 


 File  No.  EB-  02-  TC-  F-  002 


 ORDER 
 Adopted:  January  15,  2003  Released:  January  16,  2003 
 By  the  Chief,  Telecommunications  Consumers  Division,  Enforcement  Bureau: 
 1.  On  March  6,  2002,  MAP  Mobile  Communications,  Inc.  (MAP  or  Complainant)  filed  a  formal  complaint  against  MCI  WorldCom  Network  Services,  Inc.  and  MCI  WorldCom  Communications,  Inc. 
 (collectively  MCIW  or  Defendants),  pursuant  to  Section  208  of  the  Communications  Act  of  1934,  as  amended  (the  Act).  1  In  the  complaint,  MAP  alleged  that  MCIW  had  violated  Sections  201(  b)  and  202(  a)  of  the  Act  2  by 
 intentionally  misrepresenting  its  charges  and  practices,  misrepresenting  the  nature  of  its  services,  engaging  in  unfair  and  deceptive  marketing  practices,  imposing  discriminatory  charges,  providing  misleading  billing 
 information,  and  threatening  unwarranted  denial  of  service.  3  On  July  21,  2002,  after  discovery  was  completed  and  briefs  were  filed  by  both  parties,  WorldCom,  Inc.  filed  a  Voluntary  Petition  under  Chapter  11  of  the 
 United  States  Bankruptcy  Code  in  the  United  States  Bankruptcy  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of  New  York.  4  Subsequently,  MCIW  filed  a  Notice  of  Stay  (Notice),  alleging  that  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  11 
 U.  S.  C.  Section  362,  the  above-  captioned  proceeding  was  stayed,  effective  immediately.  5  MAP  filed  a  response  requesting  that  the  Telecommunications  Consumers  Division  disallow  MCIW’s  Notice  and  continue 
 its  prosecution  of  the  above-  referenced  complaint  proceeding.  6  On  January  3,  2003,  the  parties  filed  a  Joint  Motion  to  Dismiss  with  Prejudice,  notifying  the  Commission  that  they  had  reached  a  full  and  complete 


 1  47  U.  S.  C.  §  208. 
 2  Id.  §§  201(  b),  202(  a). 
 3  See  Formal  Complaint  of  MAP  Mobile  Communications,  Inc.,  at  i  (filed  March  6,  2002). 
 4  The  Petition  filed  on  behalf  of  WorldCom  has  been  assigned  Case  No.  02-  13533-  ajg. 
 5  Notice  of  Stay,  filed  July  23,  2002. 
 6  Reply  to  WorldCom  Inc.  ’s  Notice  of  Stay,  filed  July  25,  2002. 
1
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  03-  145 
 2 
 settlement  of  all  issues  raised  in  the  above-  captioned  formal  complaint  proceeding.  7  In  this  order,  we  grant  the  parties’  motion  to  dismiss  with  prejudice,  concluding  that  such  action  is  in  the  public  interest. 
 2.  We  are  satisfied  that  dismissing  this  complaint  will  serve  the  public  interest  by  promoting  the  private  resolution  of  disputes  and  by  reducing  the  expenditure  of  further  time  and  resources  by  the  parties  and 
 by  this  Commission.  Furthermore,  in  view  of  the  parties’  request  that  we  dismiss  the  complaint  with  prejudice,  we  believe  that  such  dismissal  is  in  the  public  interest. 


 3.  Accordingly,  IT  IS  ORDERED,  pursuant  to  sections  1,  4(  i),  4(  j),  201(  b),  and  208  of  the  Communications  Act  of  1934,  as  amended,  47  U.  S.  C.  §§  151,  154(  i),  154(  j),  201(  b),  208,  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  formal  complaint  of  MAP  Mobile  Communications,  Inc.  v.  WorldCom,  Inc.,  et.  al.,  filed  on  March  6,  2002,  is 
 DISMISSED  WITH  PREJUDICE. 


 FEDERAL  COMMUNICATIONS  COMMISSION 
 Colleen  Heitkamp  Chief 
 Telecommunications  Consumers  Division  Enforcement  Bureau 


 7  Joint  Motion  to  Dismiss  with  Prejudice,  filed  January  3,  2003. 
2