2. Background
On August 31, 2007, UCAN filed this complaint and a request for a cease and desist order against AT&T for imposing unauthorized charges on subscribers' cellular phone bills. The complaint was calendared on September 10, 2007 and by ALJ Resolution 176 was categorized as an adjudicatory proceeding. In its response on October 12, 2007, AT&T denied the charges in the complaint and on November 20, 2007, it moved to dismiss the complaint on three grounds: lack of jurisdiction over international telecommunications; lack of jurisdiction over commercial mobile radio service entry regulation; and failure to state a claim sufficient to establish a state law claim of "cramming" under Public Utilities Code Section 2890(a).
On November 28, 2007, a prehearing conference (PHC) was held in San Francisco. At the PHC, AT&T requested an opportunity to amend its motion to dismiss to address issues discussed at the PHC, and both parties asked to extend the 12-month statutory deadline for the proceeding in order to have additional time to engage in discovery and to use the Commission's alternative dispute resolution procedures. The parties were referred to mediation, and a second PHC scheduled.3 At the next PHC on February 29, 2008, parties requested to continue settlement discussions and also discussed the scope of issues and a procedural schedule for evidentiary hearings.4 On June 27, 2008, the Commission issued Decision (D.) 08-06-036, an order extending the statutory deadline of this proceeding to May 29, 2009.
By Administrative Law Judge ruling on August 27, 2008, AT&T's motion to dismiss the complaint was denied. The ruling found that (1) the federal telecommunications law raised by AT&T in its motion to dismiss does not preempt the Commission's jurisdiction to adjudicate this cramming complaint and (2) in its complaint, UCAN has provided a sufficient showing of potential violations of Section 2890 and General Order 168 such that the Commission must now develop the evidentiary record.
A third PHC, scheduled for September 22, 2008, was cancelled at the request of the parties. On October 17, 2008, UCAN and AT&T submitted a joint motion for approval of the Settlement Agreement. A scoping memo has not been issued in this proceeding and no evidentiary hearings were held.
3 AT&T submitted its amended motion on December 12, 2007, UCAN filed a response opposing the motion on December 27, 2007 and AT&T filed a reply on January 7, 2008.
4 At the administrative law judge's request, AT&T and UCAN agreed to meet to discuss a joint statement of issues and on March 14 filed a pleading stating they were unable to reach an agreement on the scope of issues to be adjudicated and, therefore, attached separate statements on each parties' respective positions.
