The 3rd U.S. Appeals Court, Philadelphia, reversed a lower court’...
The 3rd U.S. Appeals Court, Philadelphia, reversed a lower court’s decision to increase a bond that Sprint had to post in case it had to reimburse CAT Communications for blocking its customers from improperly using Sprint’s network. The July…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
11 decision grew out of a suit Sprint filed against CAT, a CLEC, in 2000, charging that CAT customers were using Sprint’s network for long distance calls without authorization or payment. The U.S. Dist. Court, Newark, N.J., issued a preliminary injunction in 2000 and required a $250,000 bond to cover expenses in the event CAT were found to have been enjoined wrongfully. In 2002, at the request of CAT, the Dist. Court raised the bond to $4.95 million because CAT reported it already was faced with $2.7 million in blocking fees by Verizon and other phone companies whose lines CAT leased. Sprint then appealed to the 3rd Circuit. Sprint also appealed the lower court’s decision to dissolve the preliminary injunction, but the appeals court affirmed that part (02-2209).