Before the
                Federal Communications Commission
                     Washington, D.C.  20554

In the Matter of                        )
                                  )
RCN Telecom Services of Connecticut, Inc.,   )
RCN Telecom Services of Delaware, Inc., )
RCN Telecom Services of Maryland, Inc., )
RCN Telecom Services of Massachusetts, Inc., )
RCN Telecom Services of New Jersey, Inc.,    )
RCN Telecom Services of Pennsylvania, Inc.,  )
RCN Telecom Services of Philadelphia, Inc.,  )
RCN Telecom Services of Rhode Island, Inc.,  )
RCN Telecom Services of Virginia, Inc., and  )
RCN Telecom Services of Washington DC, Inc., )    
                                  )
          Complainants,           )
                                  )          File No. E-98-29
          v.                      )
                                  )
New York Telephone Company,             )
                                  )
               Defendant.               )

                              ORDER

Adopted:  March 26, 1998                     Released:  March 27, 1998

By the Chief, Formal Complaints and Investigations Branch, Enforcement Division, Common Carrier
Bureau:

     1.   On February 20, 1998, RCN Telecom Services of Connecticut, Inc., RCN Telecom
Services of Delaware, Inc., RCN Telecom Services of Maryland, Inc., RCN Telecom Services of
Massachusetts, Inc., RCN Telecom Services of New Jersey, Inc., RCN Telecom Services of
Pennsylvania, Inc., RCN Telecom Services of Philadelphia, Inc., RCN Telecom Services of Rhode
Island, Inc., RCN Telecom Services of Virginia, Inc., and RCN Telecom Services of Washington,
D.C., Inc. (collectively "RCN") filed the above-captioned formal complaint ("Complaint") against
New York Telephone Company ("NYTC"), alleging that NYTC's refusal to provide voice mail
service ("VMS") for resale violated Sections 251(c)(4)(A) and (B) of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended.  NYTC has not yet filed an answer to the Complaint, as no answer is due to be
filed until April 10, 1998.  On March 24, 1998, RCN filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint without
prejudice.  RCN stated that, after filing the complaint, RCN learned that NYTC currently permits
resale of VMS in Connecticut and New York.  Counsel for NYTC has stated verbally to the
Commission that it does not oppose dismissal of this Complaint without prejudice.

     2.   We are satisfied that granting the RCN's motion will serve the public interest by
eliminating the need for further litigation and the expenditure of further time and resources by the
parties and by the Commission.  Because the motion to dismiss was filed prior to the filing of an
answer or any other pleadings in this proceeding, it serves the public interest to place RCN in the
same position it would have been in had this Complaint never been filed.  Thus, the complaint will
be dismissed without prejudice.

     3.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), and 208 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  151, 154(i), 154(j), 208, and the authority
delegated in Sections 0.91 and 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, 0.291, that RCN's
Motion to Dismiss Without Prejudice New York Telephone As A Defendant IS GRANTED.

     4.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the above-captioned complaint IS DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE and that this proceeding IS TERMINATED.


                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION




                              Kurt A. Schroeder
                              Chief, Formal Complaints and 
                                Investigations Branch
                              Enforcement Division
                              Common Carrier Bureau