Verizon Delaware, Inc. v. Covad Communications Co.

Good Law
232 F. Supp. 2d 1066·2002 WL 31528579·2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22316
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 13, 2002C-01-20524-JFCalifornia3,060 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fogel, J.

ORDER (1) GRANTING COVAD’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT WITH RESPECT TO VERIZON’S CLAIMS AND (2) DEEMING MOOT VERIZON’S MOTION TO DISMISS COVAD’S COUNTERCLAIMS

On August 12, 2002, the Court heard argument with respect to (1) the motion for summary judgment brought by Covad Communications Company and Dieca Communications, Inc. (collectively “Co-vad”) and (2) the motion to dismiss brought by Verizon Delaware, Inc., Verizon New England, Inc., Verizon Maryland, Inc., Verizon New Jersey, Inc., Verizon New York, Inc., Verizon Pennsylvania, Inc. and Verizon Washington, Inc. (collectively, “Verizon”). The Court has considered the briefing and evidence submitted by the parties as well as the arguments of counsel presented at the hearing. For the reasons discussed below, the Court will grant Co-vad’s motion for summary judgment and deem moot Verizon’s motion to dismiss.

I. BACKGROUND

Verizon is one of the former Bell Operating Companies spun off from AT & T in 1983. It controls the local telecommunications networks in its regions. Verizon also offers a high speed internet access service known as “digital subscriber line” (“DSL”). Covad is both Verizon’s competitor in the DSL market and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.