Precision Pay Phones v. Qwest Communications Corp.

Caution
210 F. Supp. 2d 1106·2002 WL 1428336·2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11855
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 31, 2002C-02-0213 EMC, C-02-0215 EMCCalifornia6,304 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chen, J.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS TO REMAND

I. INTRODUCTION

The Court, having reviewed the briefs, supporting documentation and record in this case, as well as having heard the argument of counsel, hereby grants the plaintiffs motions to remand these actions to state court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447 .

II. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Precision Pay Phones (“Plaintiff’) owns payphones and is a “payphone service provider” (“PSP”). PSPs generally receive compensation for use of their telephones in two ways. First, they collect coins directly deposited into their payphones. Illinois Public Telecommunications Ass’n v. F.C.C., 117 F.3d 555, 558-59 (D.C.Cir.1997). Second, they are compensated through contracts with particular “interexchange carriers” (“IXC”s) which provide long distance telephone communications services for e.g., collect calls or calls billed to a calling card or third party. Id.

However, as to payphones calls utilizing access codes (800 numbers or 10XXX numbers that the caller uses to reach a desired long-distance carrier) and subscriber 800 numbers from which an IXC (with whom the PSP does not have a contract) derives revenues, independent PSPs receive no compensation…

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.