Tech Law Journal

Capitol Dome
News, records, and analysis of legislation, litigation, and regulation affecting the computer, internet, communications and information technology sectors

TLJ Links: Home | Calendar | Subscribe | Back Issues | Reference
Other: Thomas | USC | CFR | FR | FCC | USPTO | CO | NTIA | EDGAR

MCI WorldCom v. FCC
U.S. Court of Appeals (DC Cir), Appeal No. 00-1002

Nature of the Case. Petition for Review to the U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, of an FCC order regarding "advanced services".

This page was last updated on January 1, 2001.

Parties. The petitioner is MCI WorldCom. The respondent is the Federal Communications Commission, the federal regulatory agency which issued the order of which MCI WorldCom seeks review. US West, SBC, Bell Atlantic (now Verizon), GTE, AT&T, and others, have intervened.

Citation. In the Matter of Deployment of Wireline Services Offering Advanced Telecommunications Capability, CC Docket Nos. 98-147, 98-11, 98-26, 98-32, 98-78, 98-91. Order on Remand, released December 23, 1999, FCC 99-413.

FCC Proceeding. This is a Petition for Review of the FCC's Advanced Services Order on Remand (MS Word) (FCC 99-413) concerning application of Section 251 to DSL service. The FCC ruled that DSL service provided by US West, an ILEC, is "exchange access" or "telephone exchange service".

47 U.S.C. 251 contains the interconnection provisions enacted in the Telecom Act of 1996. This section requires that ILECs, such as US West, meet certain obligations to competitors with respect to telecommunications services, including interconnection, access to unbundled network elements, resale of their retail services, notification of interoperability changes to their facilities or networks, collocation, and good faith negotiation.

US West argued that phone service, but not DSL service, is not subject to the unbundling requirements of Section 251.

The FCC ruled that DSL service is a telecommunications service, and either a "telephone exchange service" or "exchange access" within the meaning of Section 251, and hence, subject to unbundling requirements. 

Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth dissented in part.

Oral Argument before Judges Williams, Sentelle and Rogers is scheduled for 9:30 AM on Wednesday, February 21, 2001.


  • AT&T. Peter Keisler, Sidley & Austin.
  • FCC. John Ingle (202-418-1740), Laurence Bourne (202-418-1740), and Christopher Wright (202-418-1700).
  • U.S. Department of Justice. Nancy Garrison (202-514-2413) and Catherine O'Sullivan (202-514-1531).
  • US West. William Lake and John Harwood, Wilmer Cutler & Pickering (202-663-6000); and Robert McKenna at US West.
  • SBC. James Ellis.
  • GTE. Ed Whelan (202-463-5214).
  • BellSouth. Robert Sutherland (404-249-4839).
  • Bell Atlantic. Donna Epps (703-974-2815).
  • CompTel. Robert Aamoth, Kelly Dryer & Warren (202-955-9600).

Subscriptions | FAQ | Notices & Disclaimers | Privacy Policy
Copyright 1998-2008 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All rights reserved.
Phone: 202-364-8882. P.O. Box 4851, Washington DC, 20008.