Stein

Stein v. Pacific Bell

Good Law
172 F. App'x 192
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 22, 2006No. 04-16043California1,453 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Albert O. Stein (“Stein”) appeals the district court’s judgment in favor of Pacific Bell. 1 Stein brought suit against Pacific Bell, an incumbent local exchange carrier (“ILEC”), on behalf of himself and all California subscribers to Pacific Bell’s Digital Subscriber Line (“DSL”) services between May 20, 2000 and September 30, 2001, alleging violations of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (“TCA”), 47 U.S.C. § 151 et seq., and § 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2 .

The district court dismissed the TCA claims on the ground that Stein lacked a private right of action and granted Pacific Bell’s motion for summary judgment on the Sherman Act claims on the ground that the claims were foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Verizon Commc’ns, Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP, 540 U.S. 398 , 124 S.Ct. 872 , 157 L.Ed.2d 823 (2004). We agree that Trinko forecloses the Sherman Act claims and therefore affirm the district court’s decision with respect to those claims. We disagree that Stein lacked a private right of action under the TCA. The question remains, however, whether Stein properly alleged violations of a specific provision of the TCA so as to…

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.