7. Violation of Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq. ("Unfair Competition Law")

In its complaint, Greenlining asserted two causes of action under the California Unfair Competition Law: unfair business practices in violation of Business and Professions Code §§ 17200-17208, and false and misleading advertising in violation of Business and Professions Code §§ 17500 et seq. Greenlining has abandoned its separate cause of action under §17500 (see Greenlining's opening brief, p. 27, fn. 19), but continues to assert that the defendants' conduct violates § 17200. That statute defines unfair competition to include business acts or practices that are unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent, including "unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading advertising" and "false or misleading advertising" as defined by § 17500. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200.) Greenlining asks us to enjoin defendants' actions and seeks restitution, retroactive for four years from the date of the complaint, of business line usage charges which voicemail subscribers paid Pacific for call forwarding to and message retrieval from the voice mailbox.

We decline to adjudicate the Unfair Competition Law claim in this proceeding. This decision is not intended to preclude court actions by public prosecutors under the California Unfair Competition Law. (See Bus. & Prof. Code § 17204.) Such actions may be an appropriate means of enforcement in

some cases involving utilities regulated by this Commission. (See Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17205, 17534.5.)⁸