Metrophones Telecommunications, Inc. v. Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc.

We again are asked to decide whether a provider of payphone services may sue a long distance carrier to recover compensation that federal regulations, 47 C.F.R. •§§ 64.1300-1340, obligate the carrier to pay. We faced that question once before, in Greene v. Sprint Communications Co., 340 F.3d 1047, 1050-51 (9th Cir.2003), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 988 , 124 S.Ct. 2026 , 158 L.Ed.2d 492 (2004), and answered “no.” This time, the circumstances have changed materially: since our decision in Greene , which was made without the participation of the Federal Communications Commission (“Commission” or “FCC”), the Commission has interpreted a provision of the Communications Act that we did not address explicitly in Greene , 47 U.S.C. § 201 (b), to allow such actions. As we explain below, we defer to the Commission’s reasonable, authoritative interpretation of that statute. See, e.g., Nat’l Cable & Telecomms. Ass’n v. Brand X Internet Servs., — U.S. —, —-—, 125 S.Ct. 2688, 2702-12 , 162 L.Ed.2d 820 (2005) (“Brand X”) (deferring to the FCC’s interpretation of a statute).

Consequently, we affirm the district court’s decision to allow Plaintiff Metro-phones Telecommunications, Inc., a payphone…