Legal Opinion
Universal Service Fund Telephone Billing Practice Litigation v. Sprint Communications Co.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided November 8, 2005No. 04-3241PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JOHN C. PORFILIO, Circuit Judge.
Appellants AT & T Corporation (“AT & T”) and Sprint Communications Company, L.P. (“Sprint”) (jointly “Defendants”) seek reversal of an order of the district court denying their motion to compel arbitration and stay in this multi-district class action. Appellees (“Plaintiffs”) have challenged our jurisdiction to hear this interlocutory appeal. We conclude the appeal does not comply with the interlocutory appeal provisions of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA); therefore, we grant the motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
The underlying action is predicated…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Perry Education Ass'n v. Perry Local Educators' Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Catlin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,797 Norman E. Peterson v. Shearson/american Express, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1988
- McLaughlin Gormley King Company v. Terminix International Company, L.P.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1997
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Arthur Andersen LLP v. CarlisleSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- United States v. HarperCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
- Mendez v. Puerto Rican International Companies, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
- Sourcing Unlimited, Inc. v. Asimco International, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2008
- Trout Unlimited v. United States Department of AgricultureCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2006
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.