Fisher

Fisher v. Nos Communications

Good Law
495 F.3d 1052·41 Communications Reg. (P&F) 1071·2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 16259
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 10, 200704-17040California4,081 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallace, J.

This appeal arises from Multidistrict Litigation. Plaintiffs are Olga Fisher; Hudson Cap Partners (Hudson); Kids International, Inc. (Kids); Peter Enns; Om-nipure Filter Company (Omnipure); National Food Distributors, Inc. (National); Honeymoon Paper Products, Inc. (Honeymoon); CTA Research Corporation (CTA); and Sound Travel. They appeal from the district court’s dismissal of their state law claims, claims under the Federal Communications Act (FCA), 47 U.S.C. § 151 et seq., and claims under the Truth-in-Billing regulations. Sound Travel also appeals from the district court’s denial of its motion to remand to state court. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

I.

NOS Communications, Inc. (NOS) and Affinity Network, Inc. (Affinity) are telecommunications companies offering interstate service. Plaintiffs were customers of and subject to NOS’s and Affinity’s federally filed tariffs.

Fisher alleges claims for state law fraud and deceit, as well as a claim under Nevada’s consumer fraud statute, Nevada Revised Statute § 41.600. Damages are requested for the difference between the charges incurred at the rates billed by NOS…

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.