Federal Communications Commission DA 08-2663    
Before the 
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
)
In the Matter of )
)
APCC Services, Inc. )
)
Complainant, ) File No. EB-08-MD-006
)
v. )
)
Next-G Communications, Inc., )
)
Defendant. )
)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Adopted:  December 4, 2008 Released:  December 5, 2008
By the Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division, Enforcement Bureau:
1. On August 12, 2008, APCC Services, Inc. (“APCC”) filed a formal complaint1
against Next-G Communications, Inc. (“Next-G”) pursuant to section 208 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the “Act”).2 On September 10, 2008, Next-G 
requested an extension of time to file a response because “the parties to this action are engaged 
in substantive discussions and negotiations for the resolution and settlement of the APCC 
complaint.”3 Commission staff granted Next-G’s request on September 19, 2008,4 and a 
subsequent request on October 28, 2008.5  
2. On November 20, 2008, counsel for APCC filed a letter withdrawing its formal 
complaint against Next-G, stating that the “parties have resolved their dispute.”6 In light of this 
  
1 Formal Complaint, File No. EB-08-MD-006 (filed Aug. 12, 2008) (“Complaint”).  
2 47 U.S.C § 208.
3 See Letter from Ted A. Cox, counsel for Next-G, to Rosemary McEnery and Tracy Bridgham, FCC, File 
No. EB-08-MD-006 (dated Sept. 10, 2008).
4 Letter from Tracy Bridgham, FCC, to Albert H. Kramer, counsel for APCC, and Ted A. Cox, counsel for 
Next-G, File No. EB-08-MD-006 (dated Sept. 19, 2008).
5 Letter from Tracy Bridgham, FCC, to Albert H. Kramer, counsel for APCC, and Ted A. Cox, counsel for 
Next-G, File No. EB-08-MD-006 (dated Oct. 28, 2008), granting Uncontested Motion for Extension of 
Time to File Answer, File No. EB-08-MD-006 (filed Oct. 24, 2008).
6 Letter from Albert H. Kramer, counsel for APCC, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, File No. EB-08-
MD-006 (dated Nov. 20, 2008).
Federal Communications Commission DA 08-2663     
2
settlement, we are satisfied that dismissing the Complaint with prejudice will serve the public 
interest by promoting the private resolution of disputes and by eliminating the need for further 
litigation and the expenditure of further time and resources of the parties and this Commission. 
3. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED, pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), and 208 of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 154(j), 208, and sections 
1.720-1.736 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.720-1.736, and the authority delegated 
in sections 0.111 and 0.311 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311, that APCC’s 
Complaint against Next-G  in the above-captioned proceeding IS DISMISSED WITH 
PREJUDICE. 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Alexander P. Starr
Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division
Enforcement Bureau