******************************************************** NOTICE ******************************************************** This document was converted from WordPerfect or Word to ASCII Text format. Content from the original version of the document such as headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers will not show up in this text version. All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the original document will not show up in this text version. Features of the original document layout such as columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins will not be preserved in the text version. If you need the complete document, download the WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available. ***************************************************************** Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Cellco Partnership, ) Complainant, ) ) v. ) File No. WB/ENF-F-97-011 ) SNET Cellular, ) Defendant. ) ORDER Adopted: November 18, 1999 Released: November 18, 1999 By the Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division, Enforcement Bureau 1. On May 27, 1997, Cellco Partnership ("Cellco") filed a formal complaint, pursuant to Section 208 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, against SNET Cellular ("SNET"), seeking resolution of a dispute concerning the System Identification Code number which SNET used in the three cellular systems in New England that it purchased from Cellco. The Commission responded to the issues and dismissed the case in a Memorandum Opinion and Order, issued by the Deputy Chief of the Enforcement and Consumer Information Division of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau ("Bureau") on March 19, 1999, Cellco Partnership v. SNET Cellular. 2. On April 19, 1999, Cellco filed a Petition for Reconsideration of the Bureau's Memorandum Opinion and Order. Subsequently, by letter, dated November 10, 1999, Cellco advised the Bureau that the parties have resolved the underlying dispute and that it withdraws its Petition for Reconsideration. Accordingly, there are no remaining unresolved issues in this proceeding, and it is in the public interest that the proceeding should be terminated. 3. Wherefore, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i), 4(j) and 208 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and the authority delegated in Section 0.111 of the Commission's Rules, that this formal complaint proceeding IS TERMINATED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Glenn Reynolds Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division Enforcement Bureau