Panatronic Usa, a California General Partnership Lemar Textile Co. v. At&t Corporation

Good Law
287 F.3d 840·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3438·2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 7343
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 22, 200201-15470California1,817 words

Opinion

Opinion

Thompson, J.

We must determine whether AT&T’s temporary failure to assess a Universal Connectivity Charge (“UCC”) on certain customers, while assessing it on others, violated the Federal Communications Act. Panatronic USA and Lemar Textile Co. are AT&T long distance subscribers who were assessed the UCC fee. AT&T delayed assessing the fee on some of its larger customers for several months. According to the plaintiffs, this several-month delay constituted unlawful price discrimination under 47 U.S.C. § 202 (a). The plaintiffs additionally contend that AT&T’s temporary failure to impose the UCC fee on its larger customers contradicted the terms of its published tariffs, in violation of 47 U.S.C. § 203 (c).

Panatronic and Lemar sought class certification to pursue the claims on behalf of business subscribers who were assessed the UCC fee during the period January 1, 1998 through December 31, 1998. Without ruling on class certification, the district court granted AT&T’s motion for summary judgment and denied the plaintiffs’ motion to re-open discovery.

The district court had subject-matter jurisdiction under 47 U.S.C. § 207 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we…

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.