AT&T Wireless Services Inc. and Southwestco Wireless L.P. have agreed to settle their highly emotional dispute over in-market roaming in Phoenix.
The companies have resumed reciprocal cellular roaming under a new agreement and entered into a tentative settlement to resolve differences over roaming in Phoenix, said Southwestco President Greg Klimek.
In August, AT&T Wireless terminated all reciprocal roaming agreements with Southwestco and filed a lawsuit against the company, alleging a breach of a roaming agreement in Phoenix.
AT&T Wireless, operating at 1.9 GHz in Phoenix since June, wants its customers there to use dual-mode, dual-band handsets seamlessly in Arizona and surrounding markets where it doesn’t have any wireless coverage yet, and it wants its competitor, Southwestco, to agree to carry its traffic in those areas.
Southwestco, a subsidiary of Bell Atlantic Mobile that operates as Cellular One in Arizona, New Mexico and Texas, called AT&T Wireless’ request network sharing and claimed the carrier wanted to roam in Phoenix at what it considered a “ridiculously” low rate of 50 cents.
AT&T Wireless filed suit when the two attempted to renegotiate a roaming agreement that was set to expire and failed to reach an agreement over the roaming rate in Phoenix. The contract lapsed, and Southwestco began charging the defaulted rate of $3 per user and $1 per minute. AT&T Wireless claimed Southwestco failed to negotiate the new contract in good faith. It banned Southwestco’s customers from automatically roaming in its 113 cellular markets on Aug. 17, a move Southwestco believed the wireless giant made in an attempt to bully it into sharing its network in Phoenix. Southwestco said it was able to quickly secure alternative roaming agreements in those markets.
Roaming between the two was reinstated last Monday, except in Phoenix, said Ken Woo, AT&T Wireless spokesman. A gag order bars both carriers from discussing in detail the tentative settlement, which is expected to become finalized this week, said Klimek. AT&T Wireless filed a motion to dismiss the case with prejudice as part of the settlement, said Woo.
