47 C.F.R. § 20.15

Requirements under Title II of the Communications Act

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Commercial mobile radio services providers, to the extent applicable, must comply with sections 201, 202, 206, 207, 208, 209, 216, 217, 223, 225, 226, 227, and 228 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 201, 202, 206, 207, 208, 209, 216, 217, 223, 225, 226, 227, 228; part 68 of this chapter, 47 CFR part 68; and §§ 1.701-1.748, and 1.815 of this chapter, 47 CFR 1.701-1.748, 1.815.

(b) Commercial mobile radio service providers are not required to:

(1) File with the Commission copies of contracts entered into with other carriers or comply with other reporting requirements, or with §§ 1.781 through 1.814 and 43.21 of this chapter; except that commercial radio service providers that are facilities-based providers of broadband service or facilities-based providers of mobile telephony service, as described in § 1.7001(b)(1) and (3) of this chapter, are required to file reports pursuant to §§ 1.7000-1.7002 of this chapter. For purposes of this section, mobile telephony is defined as real-time, two-way switched voice service that is interconnected with the public switched network utilizing an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless handoff of subscriber calls.

(2) Seek authority for interlocking directors (section 212 of the Communications Act);

(3) Submit applications for new facilities or discontinuance of existing facilities (section 214 of the Communications Act).

(c) Commercial mobile radio service providers shall not file tariffs for international and interstate service to their customers, interstate access service, or international and interstate operator service. Sections 1.771 through 1.773 and part 61 of this chapter are not applicable to international and interstate services provided by commercial mobile radio service providers. Commercial mobile radio service providers shall cancel tariffs for international and interstate service to their customers, interstate access service, and international and interstate operator service.

(d) Except as specified as in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2), nothing in this section shall be construed to modify the Commission's rules and policies on the provision of international service under part 63 of this chapter.

(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of § 63.21(c) of this chapter, a commercial mobile radio service provider is not required to comply with § 42.10 of this chapter.

(2) A commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) provider that is classified as dominant under § 63.10 of this chapter due to an affiliation with a foreign carrier is required to comply with § 42.11 of this chapter if the affiliated foreign carrier collects settlement payments from U.S. carriers for terminating U.S. international switched traffic at the foreign end of the route. Such a CMRS provider is not required to comply with § 42.11, however, if it provides service on the affiliated route solely through the resale of an unaffiliated facilities-based provider's international switched services.

(3) For purposes of paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section, affiliated and foreign carrier are defined in § 63.09 of this Chapter.

(e) For obligations of commercial mobile radio service providers to provide local number portability, see § 52.1 of this chapter.

[59 FR 18495, Apr. 19, 1994, as amended at 61 FR 38637, July 25, 1996; 63 FR 43040, Aug. 11, 1998; 65 FR 19685, Apr. 12, 2000; 65 FR 24654, Apr. 27, 2000; 66 FR 16879, Mar. 28, 2001; 69 FR 77938, Dec. 29, 2004; ; 85 FR 838, Jan. 8, 2020]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2021 · leading case: Tenore v. AT&T Wireless Servs., 962 P.2d 104 (Wash. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Tenore v. AT&T Wireless Servs., 962 P.2d 104 (Wash. 1998). · cites it 3× “47 C.F.R. § 20.15 (a), (c) (1997); see 47 C.”

North Cnty. Commc'ns Corp. v. California Catalog & Tech., 594 F.3d 1149 (9th Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “§ 332 (c)(1)(A) and 47 C.F.R. § 20.15 (a). However, these broad statutory and regulatory provisions appear to be limited to CMRS providers’ general obligations under the Federal Communications Act.”

Orloff v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 352 F.3d 415 (D.C. Cir. 2003). · cites it 2× “See 47 C.F.R. § 20.15 . For CMRS, the Commission thereby dissolved what the Supreme Court described as the “indissoluble unity” between § 203’s tariff-filing requirement *419 and the prohibition against rate discrimination in § 202.”

Tenore v. At & T Wireless Servs., 962 P.2d 104 (Wash. 1998). · cites it 3× “47 C.F.R. § 20.15 (a), (c) (1997); see 47 C.”

Spielholz v. Superior Court of Los Angeles Cty., 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1223 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001). “1411; see 47 C.F.R. § 20.15 (c) (1999).) Section 332(c)(3)(A) states that no state or local government may “regulate .”

Castro v. Collecto, Inc., 634 F.3d 779 (5th Cir. 2011). “47 C.F.R. § 20.15 . In 1996, Congress also authorized the FCC to, if it made certain findings, release other telecommunications carriers from various requirements under the FCA, including the requirement of filing tariffs.”

In Re Hawaiian & Guamanian Cabotage Antitrust Litig., 754 F. Supp. 2d 1239 (W.D. Wash. 2010). “47 C.F.R. § 20.15 (c). In contrast, the STB permits the filing of tariffs for "information purposes,” even when the rates thereby disclosed relate to transportation not subject to regulation by the STB.”

Iberia Credit Bureau, Inc. v. Cingular Wireless, 668 F. Supp. 2d 831 (W.D. La. 2009). “47 C.F.R. § 20.15 (a), (c)(1997). In an FCC order implementing various provisions of the FCA’s 1993 amendments, the FCC concluded that sufficient competition in the cellular marketplace obviates any need for conventional regulation and decided to “forbear from imposing any…”

Lilley v. Paging Network of Ohio, Inc., 100 F. Supp. 2d 1144 (S.D. Ohio 2000). “See 47 C.F.R. § 20.15 (1998). Nevertheless, the reasonableness of PageNet’s charges and practices are regulated by the FCC, pursuant to § 201(b) of the Act.”

North Cnty. Comm v. Cellco P'ship (9th Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “§ 332 (c)(1)(A) and 47 C.F.R. § 20.15 (a). However, these broad statutory and regulatory provi- sions appear to be limited to CMRS providers’ general obligations under the Federal Communications Act.”

Mixon v. Contract Callers, Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2021). “47 C.F.R. § 20.15 . In 1996 the FCC stopped requiring tariffed rates from most carriers, cellular and otherwise.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.