Skip Navigation

Federal Communications Commission

English Display Options

Commission Document

Sprint v. Beehive

Download Options

Released: December 4, 2013

Federal Communications Commission

DA 13-2322

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of

Sprint Communications Company, L.P.,


File No. EB-13-MD-003
Beehive Telephone Co., Inc.,
Beehive Telephone Co. of Nevada, Inc., and
All American Telephone Co., Inc.,



Adopted: December 4, 2013

Released: December 4, 2013

By the Markets Dispute Resolution Division:
On December 3, 2013, All American Telephone Co., Inc. (All American) filed a Motion
to Stay Proceeding in the above-captioned litigation.1 In the Motion, All American requests that this case
be stayed pending the Commission’s ruling on All American’s Petition for Reconsideration in a separate
matter before this Commission—AT&T Corp. v. All American Telephone Co., Inc. (AT&T v. All
).2 Sprint Communications Company, L.P. (Sprint) opposed the Motion.3
We have reviewed the Motion and Opposition and find no basis for granting All
American’s request. As the Enforcement Bureau previously has held, this complaint proceeding is a
separate matter from AT&T v. All American, and each case will be decided on its own record.4 Granting
the Motion would serve only to unnecessarily delay this matter.5

1 Motion to Stay Proceeding, File No. EB-13-MD-003 (Dec. 3, 2013) (Motion). All American mailed its Motion to
the FCC on November 26, 2013, but the FCC’s Secretary’s Office did not receive it until December 3, 2013, which
is the official filing date. All American served copies of its Motion on November 26, 2013.
2 See Petition for Reconsideration, File No. EB-09-MD-010 (filed Apr. 24, 2013); see also AT&T Corp. v. All
American Tel. Co., e-Pinnacle Communications, Inc., ChaseCom,
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 28 FCC Rcd
3477 (2013).
3 Opposition to All American’s Motion to Stay Proceeding, File No. EB-13-MD-003 (filed Dec. 2, 2013)
4 See Sprint Communications Co., L.P. v. Beehive Telephone Co., Inc., et al., Order, File No. EB-13-MD-003 (Enf.
Bur. Nov. 19, 2013) at 3 (“In the separate Sprint/Beehive proceeding, Beehive will have ample opportunity,
consistent with the terms of the Court’s Referral Order, to mount its defense against Sprint’s claims, and the
Commission will then issue a decision based on applicable law and the record in that proceeding”); see also Letter
(continued . . .)

Federal Communications Commission

DA 13-2322

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), and 208, and Sections 1.720-
1.736 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.720-1.736, and the authority delegated by Sections 0.131
and 0.331 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.131, 0.331, that All American’s Motion to Stay
Proceeding is DENIED.
Rosemary H. McEnery
Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division
Enforcement Bureau
(. . . continued from previous page)

dated June 21, 2013 from Christopher Killion, Associate Chief, FCC, Enforcement Bureau to Russell D. Lukas,
Counsel for Beehive, Gary R. Guelker, Counsel for All American, Marc Goldman and William Lawson, Counsel for
Sprint, File No. EB-13-MD-003 at 5 (“Beehive will be able to respond to any ‘sham entity’ claim asserted by Sprint
in its complaint, and the Commission will decide the issue based on the record in this case”).
5 See 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i) (“The Commission may perform any and all acts, make such rules and regulations, and
issue such orders, not inconsistent with this Act, as may be necessary in the execution of its functions.”), 154(j)
(“The Commission also may conduct its proceedings in such manner as will best conduce to the proper dispatch of
business and to the ends of justice.”), 208 (“[I]t shall be the duty of the Commission to investigate the matters
complained of in such manner and by such means as it shall deem proper.”); Implementation of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996, Amendment of Rules Governing Procedures to Be Followed When Formal
Complaints Are Filed Against Common Carriers
, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 22497, 22501, para. 5 (1997)
(“Commission staff retains considerable discretion” to structure complaint proceedings), 22510, para. 29, n.68
(same), Order on Reconsideration, 16 FCC Rcd 5681 (2001).

Note: We are currently transitioning our documents into web compatible formats for easier reading. We have done our best to supply this content to you in a presentable form, but there may be some formatting issues while we improve the technology. The original version of the document is available as a PDF, Word Document, or as plain text.


You are leaving the FCC website

You are about to leave the FCC website and visit a third-party, non-governmental website that the FCC does not maintain or control. The FCC does not endorse any product or service, and is not responsible for, nor can it guarantee the validity or timeliness of the content on the page you are about to visit. Additionally, the privacy policies of this third-party page may differ from those of the FCC.