Legal Opinion

Sprint Communications Co. v. Bernsten

District Court, S.D. Iowa

Decided December 30, 2015No. 11-cv-183-JAJPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

JOHN A. JARVEY, Chief Judge, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Mediacom has historically offered its customers the ability to make telephone calls over the Internet. That technology is called “Voice over Internet Protocol,” or VoIP. One difficulty with VoIP is that traffic sent over the internet is formatted differently than traffic sent over ordinary telephone lines.1 Without something to convert Internet formatting to telephone formatting, Mediacom’s customers could not call telephone users. Sprint Communications provided that conversion service. When a Mediacom customer placed a VoIP call,…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Younger v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. v. Brand X Internet ServicesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  4. Louisiana Pub. Serv. Comm'n v. FCCSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  5. At&T Corp. v. Iowa Utilities BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1999

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. CenturyTel of Chatham, LLC v. Sprint Communications Co.District Court, W.D. Louisiana · 2016
  2. Connelly v. United States of America, Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue ServiceDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API