REDACTED - FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Enforcement Bureau
Market Disputes Resolution Division
12 st., .w.
Washington, DC 20554
April 2, 2015
Email and First-Class Mail
Donald J. Evans
Jonathan R. Markman
Fletcher, Hald & Hildreth, P.L.C.
1300 N. 17th Street
Suite 1100
Arlington, VA 22209
Counsel to Complainants
Andre J. Lachance
Tamara Preiss
Verizon Wireless
1300 I Street, NW
Suite 400-West
Washington, DC 20005
Counsel to Defendant
Re: NTCH, Inc. v. Celico Partnership d/b/a/Verizon Wireless, EB Docket No. 14-212,
File No. EB-13-MD-006
Dear Counsel:
On March 24, 2015, Commission staff held an initial status conference in the above-
referenced matter pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 1.733(a). The March 24th conference, which was
attended by representatives of Complainant, NTCH, Inc. ("NTCH"), and Defendant, Cellco
Partnership d/b/a/Verizon Wireless ("Verizon") (collectively, "the parties"), was convened to
discuss the parties' respective views and positions on pending discovery requests.'
Based on the record before us, including the parties' discovery requests, the objections,
and the agreements reached by counsel, we rule as follows:
See NTCH's First Set of Discovery Requests (filed July 2, 2014); Verizon's Opposition to NTCH's First Set of
Discovery Requests (filed Aug. 4, 2014); NTCH's Reply to Verizon's Opposition to Discovery Requests (filed Aug.
22, 2014); Verizon's First Set of Interrogatories (filed Aug. 4, 2014); NTCH's Response to Verizon's First Set of
Interrogatories (filed Aug. 22, 2014); NTCH's Second Set of Discovery Requests (filed Aug. 22, 2014); Verizon's
Opposition to NTCH's Second Set of Discovery Requests (filed Aug. 29, 2014). See also Letter to Marlene H.
Dortch, FCC, From Donald J. Evans, Counsel for NTCH, and Andre J. Lachance, Counsel for Verizon (filed Sept.
30, 2014) (attaching Joint Statement of NTCH and Verizon) ("Joint Statement Letter").
A. NTCH's First Set of luterrogatories
1. interrogatoiy Number 1, as modified by agreement of the parties, is granted to the extent
set forth herein,2 Specifically, Verizon will produce a chart reflecting the per unit rates
paid to Verizon and by Verizon in each of its existing roaming agreements for all Service
Categories (i.e., voice, toll, SMS, and data services), a statement as to whether Verizon is
a net payor or net receiver under each agreement, and volume figures reflecting total
minutes of voice roaming under each agreement. The chart produced by Verizon will not
identify Verizon's roaming partners by name.
With respect to LTE roaming rates associated with Verizon's LYE in Rural America
7See id. at 2 (noting the parties' disagreement regarding whether NTCH requested international roaming rate
information in its discovery requests). Nothing in Complainant's discovery requests refers to international roaming
2
Verizon will not produce any roaming rates associated with
or its international agreements.7
2See Joint Statement Letter at 1; E-mail from Andre J. Lathance, Counsel for Verizon, to Lisa Boehley, FCC (April
1.2015,4:43 p.m. EDT) (Joint E-mail on Discovery").
2. Interrogatory Number 2 is denied.
3. Interrogatory Number 3 is denied. As was discussed at the status conference, we deny
the request contained in the first sentence of Interrogatory Number 3, which seeks
Verizon's "rationale" for rate differences if the roaming rates Verizon has offered or
provided to other carriers differ from those offered to NTCH.8 If, after NTCH has
reviewed Verizon's response to Interrogatory Number 1, it continues to hold the view
that specific information requested in the first sentence of Interrogatory Number 3 is
relevant to the material facts in dispute, NTCH may submit a more focused request for
such information at that time.
The second sentence of Interrogatory Number 3, which seeks information regarding "the
cost elements that entered into and justified the differing rates[,]" is denied.9
4. Interrogatory Number 4 is denied.
5. Interrogatory Number 5 is granted. As was discussed at the status conference, the parties
agreed that this Interrogatory relates to retail and wholesale rates "provided" rather than
"offered" for voice and data.
6. Interrogatory Numbers 6, 7, and 8 are denied.
7. Interrogatory Number 9 is denied. As was discussed at the status conference, if, after
NTCH has reviewed Verizon's response to Interrogatory Number 1, it continues to hold
the view that the information requested in Interrogatory Number 9 is relevant to the
material facts in dispute, NTCH may submit a more focused request for such information
at that time.
B. NTCH's First Document Production Request
NTCH's request for production of documents is denied.
rates. Therefore, to the extent that counsel sought such information for the first time during a phone conference on
March 31, 2015, after the deadlines for discovery had passed and after the status conference in this case, such oral
request is denied.
8 Interrogatory Number 3 states as follows: "If the roaming rates offered or provided to the other carriers differ from
those offered to NTCH, provide the rationale for the different rate. If a difference in cost to VZW was a factor,
identi' and quantif' the cost elements that entered into and justified the differing rates."
9
C. Verizon's First Set of Interrogatories
1. Interrogatory Number 1, which is unopposed by NTCH, is granted as modified by
agreement of the parties. As modified, NTC}-I will not identify the wireless carriers
described in Interrogatory Number 1 by name.
2. Interrogatory Number 2, which is unopposed by NTCH, is granted.
D. NTCH's Second Set of Interrogatories
Interrogatory Number 1 is withdrawn by NTCH.
E. NTCH's Second Document Production Request
NTCH's request for production of documents is withdrawn by NTCH.
By April 27, 2015, the parties shall answer the pending interrogatories consistent with
the rulings in this Letter Ruling. By May 8, 2015, the Complainant shall file and serve any
supplemental discovery requests authorized by this Letter Ruling.
We issue this letter ruling under sections 4(i), 4(j), and 208 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. §
154(i), 154(j), 208, sections 1.3 and 1.720-1.736 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1,3,
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.
Rosemary McEnery
Deputy Chief, Market Division
Enforcement Bureau
cc: Christopher Killion, Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division
Lisa Boehley
4