NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC v. CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
| NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC doing business as AT&T MOBILITY |
| CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA |
| 2:2021cv00443 |
| April 6, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Christy Criswell Wiegand |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 47 U.S.C. § 553 U.S.C.A. Cable Communications Policy Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 19, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 55
ORDER re #54 Joint Status Report. This case concerns Defendant the City of Pittsburgh's setting of certain annually recurring cost-based right-of-way management fees that Plaintiff New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC d/b/a AT&T Mobility ("AT&T") contends are contrary to law. The parties represent in their Joint Status Report that those fees are based, in part, upon cost studies commissioned by the City. Following a mediation and further meetings to confer, the parties have agreed to a framework through which the City would commission a new cost study, which could resolve this case. The parties ask the Court to administratively close the case while this process proceeds. In light of the parties' stipulation, it is hereby ORDERED that this case shall be ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED pending further order of this Court. It is further ORDERED that the parties shall provide the Court periodic updates on their progress via joint status reports. The first such report shall be due on or before 3/19/2023. The Court will set the next joint status report deadline upon receiving the joint status report on 3/19/2023. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 1/19/2023. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jmm)
|
| Filing 54 STATUS REPORT Joint of the Parties by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Schubert, Christopher) |
| CLERK'S OFFICE QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE re #52 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. ERROR: Party did not file disclosure statement identifying all parent companies, subsidiaries, and affiliates that have issued shares or debt securities to the public as required pursuant to LR 7.1.A. CORRECTION: Attorney advised to file statement within 7 days under Civil > Other Filings > Other Documents > Disclosure Statement (LR 7.1.A and/or FRCvP 7.1(a)(2)). Disclosure Statement due by 12/19/2022. (ctb) |
|
Filing 53
ORDER GRANTING #52 Motion for Robert D. Gaudioso to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 12/9/2022. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jmm)
|
| Filing 52 MOTION for attorney Robert D. Gaudioso to Appear Pro Hac Vice, (Filing fee $70, Receipt # APAWDC-7433762) by Crown Castle, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Proposed Order) (Gaudioso, Robert) |
| Filing 51 REPORT of Early Neutral Evaluation Case has not resolved. JUDITH K. FITZGERALD terminated. Attorney Judith K. Fitzgerald terminated. The parties are reminded of their obligation to complete the ADR questionnaire and submit within 5 days of the conclusion of the ADR process. The questionnaire can be accessed #here or at www.pawd.uscourts.gov. Click on the ADR icon. ENE session was held held on 11/16/2022. (Fitzgerald, Judith) |
|
Filing 50
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Early Neutral Evaluation. Judith K. Fitzgerald is appointed as an early neutral evaluator. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 9/27/2022. (jmm)
|
|
Filing 49
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER: ENE to take place on or before 11/28/2022; Fact Discovery due by 2/24/2023; Post-Discovery Status Conference set for 3/3/2023 at 9:00 AM via Telephonic Conference before Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 9/27/2022. (jmm)
|
| Filing 48 Minute Entry for Initial Case Management Conference before Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand held on 9/27/2022. (Court Reporter: None) (jmm) |
| Filing 47 STIPULATION selecting ADR process by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC. (Schubert, Christopher) |
| Filing 46 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (Schubert, Christopher) |
|
Filing 45
ORDER GRANTING #44 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Emily McNally terminated. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 9/8/2022. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jmm)
|
| Filing 44 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (McNally, Emily) |
|
Filing 43
ORDER SETTING INITIAL SCHEDULING CONFERENCE: Initial Case Management Conference set for 9/27/2022 at 11:00 AM via Telephonic Conference before Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand. Rule 26 Meeting to be conducted on or before 9/13/2022. Rule 26 Meeting Report and ADR Stipulation due by 9/20/2022. Confidential Position Letters due by 9/22/2022. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 9/1/2022. (jmm)
|
| Filing 42 ANSWER to #18 Amended Complaint by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service) (Winston, Joel) |
| Filing 41 NOTICE of Appearance by Emily McNally on behalf of CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (McNally, Emily) |
| Filing 40 NOTICE of Appearance by Krysia Kubiak on behalf of CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Kubiak, Krysia) |
|
Filing 39
Order re #33 Renewed Motion to Dismiss by Defendant CITY OF PITTSBURGH (the "City"). Following the Court's review of the parties' briefing regarding Defendant CITY OF PITTSBURGH's #21 Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), which presented a factual challenge to subject matter jurisdiction, the Court ordered the parties to engage in discovery on subject matter jurisdiction. ECF No. 30. Discovery on this topic closed and the City's #33 Renewed Motion to Dismiss is ripe. In essence, the City contends that because Plaintiff NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC d/b/a AT&T MOBILITY ("AT&T") did not submit an application to the City (with all required paperwork and the required fees), the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction under the Telecommunications Act of 1996. See ECF No. 34 at 11-12 (citing 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(ii) (requiring "[s]tate or local government or instrumentality thereof [to] act on any request for authorization to place, construct, or modify personal wireless service facilities within a reasonable period of time after the request is duly filed with such government or instrumentality, taking into account the nature and scope of such request.")). The parties' briefing offers only a few general principles underlying the Rule 12(b)(1) analysis and focuses on the merits-based factual disputes. ECF No. 34 at 3; see e.g. ECF No. 35; but see ECF No. 24 at 6-7. First, upon a review of the statute, the Court is not convinced that 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(ii) is jurisdictional as opposed to a substantive provision of the TCA. Cf. T Mobile Ne. LLC v. City of Wilmington, 913 F.3d 311, 323-25 (3d Cir. 2019) (finding 30-day time limit under 47 U.S.C. 322(c)(7)(B)(v) is not jurisdictional in nature because statutory text uses permissive, non-jurisdictional language and "'absent such a clear statement [from Congress], we... should treat the restriction as nonjurisdictional in character.'" (quoting Sebelius v. Auburn Reg'l Med. Ctr., 568 U.S. 145, 153 (2013)); Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick, 559 U.S. 154, 166 (2010) ("A statutory condition that requires a party to take some action before filing a lawsuit is not automatically a jurisdictional prerequisite to suit.... We similarly have treated as nonjurisdictional other types of threshold requirements that claimants must complete, or exhaust, before filing a lawsuit." (internal citations and quotations omitted)). Second, even if this were a jurisdictional question, the resulting discovery on this issue as set forth in the parties' briefing, has led the Court to conclude that any potential question of subject matter jurisdiction is inextricably intertwined with the substantive issues in this case. Based on the parties' briefing, the core issue is as follows: if AT&T's request was "duly filed," then it would appear, based on the current state of parties' briefing and facts, that the City would have violated Section 332(c)(7)(B)(ii) of the TCA. However, if AT&T's request was not "duly filed," then it would appear, based on the current state of parties' briefing and facts, that there would have been no obligation for the City to act and thus there would not have been a violation of Section 332(c)(7)(B)(ii) of the TCA. Further, AT&T's other counts in the Amended Complaint contain allegations closely related to the wireless application's requirements and the failure to timely act on such application. ECF No. 18 at paras. 73-75, 77, 85, 92-93. Following jurisdictional discovery, it is clear that there are genuinely disputed facts as to whether the application was "duly filed," such that this question is intertwined with the underlying merits of the decision. Cf. Nextel Ptnrs. Inc., v. Kingston Twp., 286 F.3d 687 (3d Cir. 2002) (finding no failure to act where plaintiff never applied for permit). Thus, the Court, in accordance with instructions from the Third Circuit, finds that jurisdiction exists and considers the current motion as a direct attack on the merits of AT&T's case. Davis v. Wells Fargo, 824 F.3d 333, 348 (3d Cir. 2016) ("a district court must take care not to reach the merits of a case when deciding a Rule 12(b)(1) motion.... Jurisdictional finding of genuinely disputed facts is inappropriate when the jurisdictional issue and substantive issues are so intertwined that the question of jurisdiction is dependent on the resolution of factual issues going to the merits of an action.... [W]hen a factual challenge to jurisdiction attacks facts at the core of the merits of the underlying cause of action, the proper procedure for the district court is to find that jurisdiction exists and to deal with the objection as a direct attack on the merits of the plaintiff's case" (internal citations and quotations omitted)). The City's 12(b)(6) Motion fairs no better, because the City's argument is essentially the same: that AT&T's Amended Complaint does not plead payment-in-full of the application fees or that the application was "duly filed." After reviewing the Complaint, the Court finds that the factual allegations related to AT&T's wireless applications are "enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level," Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) and are "sufficient... to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). Thus, the City's #33 Renewed Motion to Dismiss is HEREBY DENIED. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 8/15/2022. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (cmh)
|
|
Filing 38
ORDER GRANTING #37 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Yvonne Schlosberg Hilton terminated. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 8/15/2022. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jmm)
|
| Filing 37 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Hilton, Yvonne) |
| Filing 36 REPLY BRIEF re #35 Brief in Opposition to Motion, filed by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service, #2 Exhibit Exhibit 22) (Winston, Joel) |
| Filing 35 BRIEF in Opposition re #33 Motion to Dismiss filed by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1_Supp. Aff. of R. Bohrer, #2 Exhibit 2_Aff. of K. McKinley, #3 Exhibit 3_(ATT 12; 31), #4 Exhibit 4_(PGH 431), #5 Exhibit 5_(PGH 419), #6 Exhibit 6_(PGH 14; 31), #7 Exhibit 7_(PGH 423), #8 Exhibit 8_(PGH 814), #9 Exhibit 9_(PGH 811), #10 Proposed Order) (Schubert, Christopher) |
| Filing 34 BRIEF in Support re #33 Motion to Dismiss filed by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit 7, #8 Exhibit 8, #9 Exhibit 9, #10 Exhibit 10, #11 Exhibit 11, #12 Exhibit 12, #13 Exhibit 13, #14 Exhibit 14, #15 Exhibit 15, #16 Exhibit 16, #17 Exhibit 17, #18 Exhibit 18, #19 Exhibit 19, #20 Exhibit 20, #21 Exhibit 21) (Winston, Joel) |
| Filing 33 Renewed MOTION to Dismiss by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service, #2 Proposed Order, #3 CERTIFICATE OF GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO MEET AND CONFER WITH NON-MOVANT) (Winston, Joel) |
|
Filing 32
ORDER GRANTING #31 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. Plaintiff NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC's responses and production to Defendant's discovery due by 2/28/2022; Defendant CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA's responses and production to Plaintiff's discovery due by 3/8/2022; Renewed motion to dismiss, if any, due on or before 3/30/2022; Plaintiff's brief in opposition to motion to dismiss due 21 days from the filing of said motion. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 2/14/2022. (jmm)
|
| Filing 31 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order, #2 Certificate of Service) (Shiring, Michael) |
|
Filing 30
ORDER. The Court has reviewed the parties' briefing regarding Defendant CITY OF PITTSBURGH's #21 Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). The case relates to Plaintiff NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC's desire to construct and operate two 5G wireless communications facilities within the City of Pittsburgh, and to install 5G facilities on existing streetlight poles. Defendant makes a factual challenge to subject matter jurisdiction, asserting that Plaintiff did not "duly file" its applications for the 5G facilities with the City and therefore, the federal Telecommunications Act is not triggered, and federal question jurisdiction does not exist in this case. Plaintiff asserts that subject matter jurisdiction does exist. The parties have filed competing declarations in support of their positions on subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff bears the burden of showing that subject matter jurisdiction exists, and because Defendant raises a factual challenge to subject matter jurisdiction, the Court may weigh the evidence to satisfy itself that subject matter jurisdiction exists. The Court cannot make that determination without additional information. Therefore, the parties are HEREBY ORDERED to engage in an expedited 45 day period of discovery on the issue of whether subject matter jurisdiction exists, which may include discovery regarding: (1) whether Plaintiff's applications were filed/submitted; (2) whether the applications were "complete," including whether an executed right of way agreement and/or insurance certificate and bond were required to be submitted in order for the application to be "filed" or could be provided at some later time, and including what "fees" were required to be paid, and when. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the jurisdictional discovery period will close on 2/18/2022. Defendant's current Motion to Dismiss is denied without prejudice and, if appropriate, Defendant may file a renewed motion to dismiss after jurisdictional discovery, on or before 3/11/2022. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's #27 Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Notice of Supplemental Authority is hereby dismissed as moot. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 1/5/2022. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jmm)
|
| Filing 29 BRIEF in Opposition re #27 Motion to Strike Notice of Supplemental Authority filed by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Appendix Cert of Counsel, #2 Proposed Order) (Schubert, Christopher) |
| Filing 28 BRIEF in Support re #27 Motion to Strike NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY PLEADING filed by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Winston, Joel) |
| Filing 27 MOTION to Strike #26 Notice OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service, #2 Proposed Order) (Winston, Joel) |
| Filing 26 NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC (Attachments: #1 Appendix Pennsylvania ACT 50) (Schubert, Christopher) |
| Filing 25 REPLY BRIEF re #24 Brief in Opposition to Motion, filed by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Winston, Joel) |
| Filing 24 BRIEF in Opposition re #21 Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction,, Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, filed by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit R. Bohrer, #2 Affidavit K. McKinley, #3 Proposed Order) (Schubert, Christopher) |
| Filing 23 Proposed Order re #21 Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction,, Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Winston, Joel) |
| CLERK'S OFFICE QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE re #21 Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction, Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. ERROR: Brief should have been filed as a separate document. CORRECTION: Attorney advised in future that documents of that nature are to be filed as separate documents. Clerk of Court removed from public view attachment one since court docketed correctly #22 BRIEF in Support re #21 Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction, Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. This message is for informational purposes only. (jv) |
| CLERK'S OFFICE QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE re #21 Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction,Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. ERROR: Proposed Order was not attached. CORRECTION: Attorney is advised to file a proposed order by using the Proposed Order event and linking it to the document in question. (jv) |
| Filing 22 BRIEF in Support re #21 Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction, Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, filed by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (jv) |
| Filing 21 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Attachments: #1 Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss, #2 Exhibit Declaration of Director of Mobility and Infrastructure, #3 Certificate of Good Faith Effort to Meet and Confer) (Winston, Joel) Modified text on 7/23/2021 to remove from public view attachment one. (jv) |
| Filing 20 NOTICE of Appearance by Michael Roberts on behalf of CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Roberts, Michael) |
| Filing 19 Stipulation for Extension of Time to Answer by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Answer due from CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA on 7/21/2021. (Winston, Joel) |
| Filing 18 First AMENDED COMPLAINT against CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, filed by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC. (Schubert, Christopher) |
| Filing 17 Stipulation for Extension of Time to Answer by CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Answer due from CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA on 7/15/2021. (Winston, Joel) |
| Filing 16 NOTICE of Appearance by Joel Winston on behalf of CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Winston, Joel) |
| Filing 15 NOTICE of Appearance by Daniel Cohen on behalf of CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Cohen, Daniel) |
| Filing 14 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC. CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA waiver sent on 4/8/2021, answer due 6/7/2021. (Schubert, Christopher) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Appearance by Yvonne Schlosberg Hilton on behalf of CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Hilton, Yvonne) |
| Filing 12 NOTICE of Appearance by Michael E. Kennedy on behalf of CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. (Kennedy, Michael) |
|
Filing 11
ORDER GRANTING #8 Motion for RAYMOND PAUL BOLANOS to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 4/8/2021. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jmm)
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER GRANTING #7 Motion for MICHAEL THOMAS SHIRING to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 4/8/2021. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jmm)
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER GRANTING #6 Motion for CHRISTOPHER H. SCHUBERT to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 4/8/2021. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jmm)
|
| Filing 8 MOTION for attorney RAYMOND PAUL BOLANOS to Appear Pro Hac Vice, (Filing fee $70, Receipt # APAWDC-6450866) by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit with Exhibit A (Good Standing Cert), #2 Proposed Order) (Schubert, Christopher) |
| Filing 7 MOTION for attorney MICHAEL THOMAS SHIRING to Appear Pro Hac Vice, (Filing fee $70, Receipt # APAWDC-6450845) by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit with Exhibit A (Good Standing Cert), #2 Proposed Order) (Shiring, Michael) |
| Filing 6 MOTION for attorney CHRISTOPHER H. SCHUBERT to Appear Pro Hac Vice, (Filing fee $70, Receipt # APAWDC-6450732) by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit with Exhibit A (Good Standing Cert), #2 Proposed Order) (Schubert, Christopher) |
| Filing 5 AT&T SCHEDULING NOTICE FOR ALL TELEPHONIC CONFERENCES. Every Telephonic Conference conducted will be via an AT&T call-in number which requires participants to dial-in and provide an access code. When a Telephonic Conference is scheduled you will be instructed to refer back to this Notice. This document has a security setting of "Case Participants Only," so only those individuals will have access to view the document. (jmm) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER re Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) Motions to Dismiss as more fully stated in said order. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 4/8/2021. (jmm)
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE that instant civil action has been designated for placement into the United States District Court's Alternative Dispute Resolution program. Parties are directed to fully complete the required 26(f) report, which includes the stipulation of selecting an ADR process. Counsel for plaintiff shall make service of the notice on all parties. (jmm) |
| Filing 2 Disclosure Statement identifying AT&T, Inc. as corporate parent or other affiliate, by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC. (Schubert, Christopher) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA (Filing fee, including Administrative fee, $402, receipt number APAWDC-6447134), filed by NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (jv) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Pennsylvania Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC v. CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: CITY OF PITTSBURGH, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA | |
| Represented By: | Yvonne Schlosberg Hilton |
| Represented By: | Michael E. Kennedy |
| Represented By: | Joel Winston |
| Represented By: | Daniel Cohen |
| Represented By: | Michael Roberts |
| Represented By: | Emily McNally |
| Represented By: | Krysia Kubiak |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC doing business as AT&T MOBILITY | |
| Represented By: | Christopher H Schubert |
| Represented By: | Michael T Shiring |
| Represented By: | Raymond Bolanos |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
