40 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Copyright © 2021 E. William Horne. All Rights Reserved.

The Telecom Digest for Thu, 16 Jun 2022
Volume 41 : Issue 113 : "text" format

table of contents
Copper Retirement Network Change Notification Filed By At&T Georgia
AT&T Enters pleading in bankruptcy case
Re: I think I understand, sort of, maybe, possibly

Message-ID: <20220615000346.AC8F6892@telecom2018.csail.mit.edu> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2022 00:03:46 +0000 (UTC) From: Bill Horne <malQRMassimilation@gmail.com> Subject: Copper Retirement Network Change Notification Filed By At&T Georgia Wireline Competition Bureau Copper Retirement Network Change Notification Filed By Bellsouth Telecommunications, Llc D/B/A At&T Georgia WC Docket No. 22-225 June 7, 2022 Report No. NCD-3463 Re: Copper Retirement Network Change Certification Received BellSouth Telecommunications, LLC d/b/a AT&T Georgia (AT&T), an incumbent local exchange carrier (LEC), has filed certification that public notice of network change(s) involving the retirement of copper has been provided through its publicly accessible Internet site, as required by section 51.329(a)(2) of the rules of the Federal Commun- ications Commission (FCC or Commission), together with certification of service on identified interconnecting telephone exchange service providers, as required by section 51.333(a). Upon initial review the filing appears to be complete. Specific network change information can be obtained on the Internet at: https://ebiznet.att.com/networkreg/. https://www.fcc.gov/document/wcb-copper-retirement-network-change-notification-filed-att-ga-29 -- (Please remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly)
Message-ID: <20220615001947.2529F892@telecom2018.csail.mit.edu> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2022 00:19:47 +0000 (UTC) From: Bill Horne <malQRMassimilation@gmail.com> Subject: AT&T Enters pleading in bankruptcy case U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT Honorable Bess M. Parrish Creswell Tuesday, May 24, 2022 Montgomery Phone: (877) 336-1839 Participant Code: 361328 ATT Conference BPC 1:15 PM 20-30233 John Sullivan Woodall, Jr. and Ch 7 Michele Renee Woodall Trustee: Wilkins Opposing: Debtor or Plaintiff Attorney: Byron Mark Richardson Matter: Doc# 52 Trustee's Final Report (TFR) for Compensation and Expenses https://www.almb.uscourts.gov/sites/almb/files/2022t0524.pdf +--------------------------------------------------------------+ (Please remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly) ***** Moderator's Note ***** Make of it what you will: I'm not a lawyer, so stuff like this is more for background than anything else. Bill Horne Moderator
Message-ID: <0a8d375c-11ca-1591-1f38-dc4796c7d0af@ionary.com> Date: 12 Jun 2022 11:16:51 -0400 From: "Fred Goldstein" <invalid@see.sig.telecom-digest.org> Subject: Re: I think I understand, sort of, maybe, possibly On 6/11/2022 11:18 AM, Bill Horne wrote: > ***** Moderator's Note ***** > > I need a lawyer, Or a linguist, or a shaman, or a soothsayer. I need > *somebody* that can tell me what a "Modified Final Judgement" is, and > why it's being done, and whether it should have been done, and if it > is going to make any difference to we telephone users. > > I need help. > > Bill Horne > Moderator > > +--------------------------------------------------------------+ > > Defendants entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger dated June 5, > 2008, pursuant to which Verizon Communications Inc. ("Verizon") > acquired Alltel Corporation ("Alltel"). Plaintiffs United States and > the States of Alabama, California, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, North > Dakota, and South Dakota ("plaintiff States") filed a civil antitrust > Complaint on October 30, 2008, seeking to enjoin the proposed > acquisition. As explained more fully in the Complaint, and the > concurrently filed Competitive Impact Statement, the likely effect of > this acquisition would have been to lessen competition substantially > for mobile wireless telecommunications services in 94 Cellular Market > Areas ("CMAs") in 22 states (1) where Verizon and Alltel were among > the most significant competitors, in violation of Section 7 of the > Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18. This loss of competition would have > resulted in consumers in those areas facing higher prices, lower > quality service and fewer choices of mobile wireless > telecommunications services. > > https://www.justice.gov/atr/case-document/memorandum-plaintiff-united-states-support-unopposed-motion-modify-final-judgmen-0 > The MFJ in question is dated 2011, so this is very old news. It concerned terms of Verizon's acquisition of Alltel. The original wireline Alltel had been spun off as Windstream, and there were markets where Verizon and Alltel were the two main mobile competitors, so Verizon was not allowed to acquire those Alltel markets. A new mini-Alltel thus continued in those markets under Atlantic Telenetwork ownership. An MFJ, as I understand it as a non-lawyer, is when a previously settled case is reopened in order to modify some of its conditions. A case closes with a Final Judgement (FJ) and thus an MFJ happens when there is reason to revisit it. The 1984 AT&T divestiture was probably the most famous Modification of Final Judgment, at least in telecom. It was a consent decree (both parties agreed to it) to modify restraints put on AT&T in a 1956 settlement, the FJ that was modified, which had permitted AT&T to continue as a monopoly but which largely limited Western Electric to selling only within the Bell System, not in competitive markets. --- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred "at" ionary.com +1 617 795 2701 ***** Moderator's Note ***** Here's why I'm confused: there was an announcement, dated a few days ago, and I don't understand /what/ was modified, or /why/. I think I'll go get a law degree: are there correspondence courses that will make me a lawyer? Bill Horne Moderator

End of telecom Digest Thu, 16 Jun 2022

Helpful Links
Telecom Digest Archives The Telecom Digest FAQ