CTIA - The Wireless Assoc. v. PR Telecommunications Regul., 1st Cir. (2014)

7/26/2019 CTIA - The Wireless Assoc. v. PR Telecommunications Regul., 1st Cir. (2014)

1/23

United States Court of AppealsFor the First Circuit

No. 12- 2427

TELECOMMUNI CATI ONS REGULATORY BOARD OF PUERTO RI CO;SANDRA TORRES- LPEZ, i n her of f i ci al capaci t y as Pr esi dentof t he Tel ecommuni cat i ons Regul atory Boar d of Puer t o Ri co;

VI CENTE AGUI RRE- I TURRI NO, i n hi s of f i ci al capaci t y asAssoci at e Member of t he Tel ecommuni cat i ons Regul at or y Boar dof Puer t o Ri co; NI XYVETTE SANTI NI - HERNNDEZ, i n her of f i ci al

capaci t y as Associ at e Member of t he Tel ecommuni cat i onsRegul at or y Boar d of Puer t o Ri co; and ALEJ ANDRO GARC A- PADI LLA,

i n hi s of f i ci al capaci t y as Gover nor of Puer t o Ri co,

Def endant s, Appel l ant s,

v.

CTI A - THE WI RELESS ASSOCI ATI ON,

Pl ai nt i f f , Appel l ee.

APPEAL FROM THE UNI TED STATES DI STRI CT COURTFOR THE DI STRI CT OF PUERTO RI CO

[ Hon. Franci sco A. Besosa, U. S. Di st r i ct J udge]

Bef or eTor r uel l a, Li pez, and Kayat t a,

Ci r cui t J udges.

Rober t F. Rekl ai t i s, wi t h whom Cynt hi a Fl emi ng Cr awf or d andLecl ai r Ryan, wer e on br i ef f or appel l ant s.

Todd M. Hi nnen, wi t h whomJ ohn K. Roche and Per ki ns Coi e LLP,wer e on br i ef f or appel l ee.

May 9, 2014


2/23

TORRUELLA, Circuit Judge. At i ssue i n t hi s case i s a l aw

passed by the government of Puer t o Ri co t o obt ai n i nf ormat i on about

t he owners of pr epai d cel l phones. The Puer t o Ri can government

passed t he Act of Dec. 27, 2011, No. 280, 2011 P. R. Laws 2963

( codi f i ed at P. R. Laws Ann. t i t . 27, 531- 539 ( Supp. 2013) ) ( t he

"Regi st r y Act " ) , i n order t o combat t he use of anonymous prepai d

cel l phones f or cr i mi nal pur poses i n Puer t o Ri co. The Regi st r y Act

f unct i ons by r equi r i ng t el ephone compani es and ot her sel l er s of

pr epai d phones t o pr ovi de i nf ormat i on about t he pur chaser s of such

phones t o t he gover nment of Puer t o Ri co. The government t hen

compi l es a r egi st r y wi t h t he names, number s, and addr esses of al l

t hose who pur chase pr epai d cel l phones i n Puer t o Ri co.

The quest i on bef or e us i s whether t he Regi st r y Act

conf l i ct s wi t h and i s preempt ed by t he f eder al St or ed

Communi cat i ons Act , 18 U. S. C. 2701- 2712 ( t he "SCA") , whi ch

r est r i ct s t he abi l i t y of wi r el ess communi cat i ons pr ovi der s t o

r el ease cust omer i nf or mat i on t o gover nment al ent i t i es. Af t er

car ef ul consi der at i on, we af f i r mt he di st r i ct cour t ' s f i ndi ng t hat

t he Regi st r y Act i s pr eempt ed by t he SCA and t hat i t s enf orcement

shoul d be enj oi ned.

I. Background

A. The Registry Act

On December 27, 2011, Puer t o Ri co Gover nor Lui s For t uo

si gned i nt o l aw t he Regi st r y Act . Accor di ng t o t he Act ' s

-2-


3/23

expl anat ory st at ement , whi l e many i ndi vi dual s l egi t i mat el y pur chase

pr epai d phones t o avoi d si gni ng bur densome cont r act s or payi ng f or

unnecessary servi ce, t he cr i mi nal use of such phones has become

wi despr ead i n Puer t o Ri co. See Regi st r y Act , pmbl . 1 The Regi st r y

Act was t hus cr eat ed t o addr ess t he "pr obl em . . . t hat t he owner s

of t hese mobi l e uni t s, because t hey ar e pr e- pai d, ar e not

r egi st er ed by t he var i ous compani es, maki ng i t i mpossi bl e f or t he

aut hor i t i es t o t r ack down t hei r owner s" i n t he event t he phone i s

used t o commi t a cr i mi nal of f ense l i ke ext or t i on. I d.

To combat t hi s pr obl em, t he Regi st r y Act i nst r uct s t he

Tel ecommuni cat i ons Regul at or y Boar d of Puer t o Ri co ( t he "Boar d") ,

a government agency t asked wi t h r egul at i ng t el ecommuni cat i ons

ser vi ces i n Puer t o Ri co, t o cr eat e and mai nt ai n a r egi st r y of

pr epai d cel l phone number s. I d. 3- 5. To ensur e t hat t he Board

i s pr ovi ded wi t h t he i nf or mat i on i t needs t o cr eat e a r egi st r y, t he

Act r equi r es t hat :

Ever y t el ephone company, natur al or l egalper son, or busi ness ent i t y t hat sel l s a pr e-pai d mobi l e t el ephone uni t shal l r equi r e phot oi dent i f i cat i on at t he t i me of pur chase andshal l r egi st er wi t h t he Boar d t he name andphysi cal and post al addr ess of t he owner of

1 Al l r ef er ences t o t he Regi st r y Act i n t hi s opi ni on ar e based on

an Engl i sh- l anguage t r ansl at i on of t he Act used by t he par t i es i nt he pr oceedi ngs bel ow and agai n on appeal . Al t hough t he Puer t oRi co Legi sl at i ve Assembl y has yet t o pr ovi de an of f i ci al , Engl i sh-l anguage t r ansl at i on of t he Regi st r y Act , CTI A f i l ed i n t hedi st r i ct cour t a t r ansl at i on of t he Act on whi ch bot h par t i es r el y.Appel l ant s do not di sput e t he accur acy of t he t r ansl at i on, whi ch i sat t ached t o t hi s opi ni on as an Appendi x.

-3-


4/23

t he uni t and an al t er nat i ve t el ephone number ,t he number of t he uni t , i t s make, model , andser i al number .

I d. 5. Thi s i nf or mat i on must be pr ovi ded t o t he Boar d wi t hi n

t hi r t y days of pur chase, and t he penal t y f or f ai l i ng t o do so i s a

f i ne of up t o $25, 000 f or each vi ol at i on. I d. 8.

B. Procedural history

Pl ai nt i f f - Appel l ee CTI A - The Wi r el ess Associ at i on

( "CTI A") i s a non- pr of i t cor por at i on t hat r epr esent s t he i nt er est s

of t he wi r el ess communi cat i ons i ndust r y. CTI A' s member s i ncl ude

Spr i nt , AT & T, T- Mobi l e, and ot her s who sel l pr epai d cel l phones

i n Puer t o Ri co. On Febr uary 15, 2012, CTI A sued t he Boar d, t hr ee

of t he Boar d' s member s i n t hei r of f i ci al capaci t i es, and Gover nor

For t uo i n hi s of f i ci al capaci t y ( col l ect i vel y, t he "Appel l ant s") .

CTI A sought decl ar at or y and i nj unct i ve r el i ef , ar gui ng t hat t he

Regi st r y Act was pr eempted by t he SCA because the SCA prohi bi t s

CTI A' s member s f r om t ur ni ng over t o t he gover nment - - wi t hout a

subpoena - - t he same i nf or mat i on t hat t he Regi st r y Act r equi r es

t hem t o pr ovi de.

Appel l ant s moved t o di smi ss t he compl ai nt , and t he

di st r i ct cour t deni ed t he mot i on t o di smi ss on August 2, 2012,

adopt i ng t he magi st r ate j udge' s r ecommendat i on and f i ndi ng t hat t he

t wo l aws cl ear l y conf l i ct . The di st r i ct cour t det er mi ned t hat t he

pl ai n l anguage of t he SCA pr ohi bi t s t he di scl osur e of cel l - phone

cust omer i nf or mat i on i n t he manner t hat t he Regi st r y Act r equi r es.

-4-


5/23

The di st r i ct cour t t hen r ef er r ed back t o t he magi st r at e j udge t he

quest i on whet her t he cour t shoul d per manent l y enj oi n t he

enf or cement of t he Regi st r y Act . On Oct ober 18, 2012, t he di st r i ct

cour t adopt ed t he magi st r ate j udge' s f i ndi ngs and r ecommendat i ons

and gr ant ed CTI A' s mot i on f or a per manent i nj unct i on. Thi s t i mel y

appeal f ol l owed.

II. Discussion

On appeal , Appel l ant s ar gue that t he Regi st r y Act

const i t ut es a val i d exer ci se of Puer t o Ri co' s pol i ce power s t hat

does not conf l i ct wi t h t he SCA. Poi nt i ng t o t he st r uct ur e and

pur pose of t he SCA, Appel l ant s cont end t hat t he SCA pr otect s onl y

cust omer i nf or mat i on r el at ed t o speci f i c communi cat i ons. I t does

not , t hey ar gue, pr ot ect t he i nf or mat i on r equi r ed by t he Regi st r y

Act , l i ke a cust omer ' s name and addr ess capt ur ed at t he t i me of

pur chase and unt ethered t o any par t i cul ar communi cat i ons or

t r ansact i onal r ecor d. Thus, Appel l ant s concl ude t hat t he SCA and

Regi st r y Act do not conf l i ct , t he Regi st r y Act i s not pr eempt ed,

and t he j udgment of t he di st r i ct cour t shoul d be r ever sed. 2

2 Dur i ng t he cour se of pr oceedi ngs bel ow, Appel l ant s' Response i nOpposi t i on t o CTI A' s Mot i on f or Per manent I nj unct i on expr essl yasked t he di st r i ct cour t t o anal yze t he Regi st r y Act i n t ot o and t or ef r ai n f r omaddr essi ng any possi bi l i t y of sever i ng appl i cat i on of

t he Act t o non- CTI A member s, ar gui ng that t he ef f ect i veness of t heAct depends on i t s f ul l appl i cat i on. Thi s i s per haps unsur pr i si ng,gi ven t hat t he chal l enged pr ovi si ons f or m t he f unct i onal cor e oft he Regi st r y Act . See Acker l ey Commc' ns of Mass. , I nc. v. Ci t y ofCambr i dge, 135 F. 3d 210, 216 ( 1st Ci r . 1998) ( hol di ng t hatsever abi l i t y cl ause coul d not save unconst i t ut i onal or di nancebecause the cour t coul d not concl ude t hat t he l egi sl at ur e vi ewed

-5-


6/23

We r evi ew t he di st r i ct cour t ' s f i ndi ng t hat t he Regi st r y

Act i s pr eempt ed by t he SCA de novo. See Weaver ' s Cove Ener gy, LLC

v. R. I . Coast al Res. Mgmt . Counci l , 589 F. 3d 458, 472 ( 1st Ci r .

2009) ; SPGGC, LLC v. Ayot t e, 488 F. 3d 525, 530 ( 1st Ci r . 2007) .

Under t he Supr emacy Cl ause of t he Const i t ut i on, " t he Laws

of t he Uni t ed St ates . . . shal l be t he supr eme Law of t he Land;

and t he J udges i n ever y St ate shal l be bound t her eby, any Thi ng i n

t he . . . Laws of any St at e t o t he Cont r ar y not wi t hst andi ng. " U. S.

Const . ar t . VI , cl . 2. "By vi r t ue of t hi s commandment , st at e l aw

t hat conf l i cts wi t h f eder al l aw i s a nul l i t y. " Mass. Ass' n of

Heal t h Mai nt . Or gs. v. Rut har dt , 194 F. 3d 176, 178 ( 1st Ci r . 1999) .

Nul l i f i cat i on of st at e l aw i s no smal l mat t er , and t hus we "st ar t

wi t h t he assumpt i on t hat t he hi st or i c pol i ce power s of t he St at es

ar e not t o be super seded by . . . Feder al Act unl ess t hat i s t he

cl ea

r and mani f est pur pose of Congr ess. " Gr ant ' s Dai r y - Mai ne,

LLC v. Comm' r of Me. Dep' t of Agr i c. , Food & Rur al Res. , 232 F. 3d

t he of f endi ng pr ovi si ons " as anyt hi ng but a uni t ar y par t " of t heordi nance) ; see al so Reno v. ACLU, 521 U. S. 844, 884- 85 ( 1997)( "Thi s Cour t wi l l not r ewr i t e a l aw t o conf or mi t t o const i t ut i onalr equi r ement s. " ( i nt er nal quot at i on mar ks and ci t at i on omi t t ed) ) .Appel l ant s seemi ngl y mai nt ai n t hi s posi t i on on appeal , as t hey donot chal l enge t he scope of t he i nj unct i on - - whi ch enj oi nsenf or cement of t he Regi st r y Act i n tot o - - or ar gue t hat sever ance

of t he di sput ed pr ovi si ons i s a possi bi l i t y. Thus, even i fAppel l ant s had not expl i ci t l y wai ved t he i ssue bel ow, t hei r f ai l ur et o r ai se i t on appeal woul d have wai ved any pot ent i al cl ai mr egar di ng sever abi l i t y or t he scope of t he i nj unct i on. Cf . Uni t edPar cel Ser v. , I nc. v. Fl or es- Gal ar za, 318 F. 3d 323, 338 ( 1st Ci r .2003) ( l i mi t i ng r emand on i ssue of i nj unct i on' s scope t o onl y t hosecl ai ms br i ef ed and argued on appeal ) .

-6-


7/23

8, 14- 15 ( 1st Ci r . 2000) ( i nt er nal quot at i on mar ks and ci t at i on

omi t t ed) . 3

Whi l e ther e ar e a number of ways i n whi ch Congress coul d

pr eempt st at e l aw, see SPGGC, 488 F. 3d at 530- 31 ( descr i bi ng

expr ess preempt i on, f i el d pr eempt i on, conf l i ct pr eempt i on, and

compl et e pr eempt i on) , r el evant her e i s CTI A' s cl ai m of conf l i ct

pr eempt i on. Conf l i ct pr eempt i on occur s when f eder al l aw i s i n

"i r r econci l abl e conf l i ct " wi t h st at e l aw, Bar net t Bank of Mar i on

Cnt y. , N. A. v. Nel son, 517 U. S. 25, 31 (1996) , as "when compl i ance

wi t h bot h st at e and f eder al l aw i s i mpossi bl e, or when t he st at e

l aw st ands as an obst acl e to t he accompl i shment and execut i on of

t he f ul l pur poses and obj ect i ves of Congr ess. " Weaver ' s Cove

Ener gy, LLC, 589 F. 3d at 472- 73 ( i nt er nal quotat i on marks and

ci t at i on omi t t ed) .

CTI A ar gues, and t he di st r i ct cour t f ound, t hat t he

Regi st r y Act and t he SCA di r ect l y and i r r econci l abl y conf l i ct

because t he SCA pr ohi bi t s wi r el ess ser vi ce pr ovi der s f r ompr ovi di ng

cust omer i nf ormat i on t o the government wi t hout a subpoena, whi l e

t he Regi st r y Act r equi r es t he same. Appel l ant s, on t he other hand,

3 Al t hough t he Commonweal t h of Puer t o Ri co i s a t er r i t ory of t heUni t ed St at es r at her t han a st at e, t he t est f or pr eempt i on i s t he

same. P. R. Dep' t of Consumer Af f ai r s v. I sl a Pet r ol eum Cor p. , 485U. S. 495, 499 ( 1998) ( " [ T] he t est f or f eder al pr e- empt i on of t hel aw of Puer t o Ri co at i ssue her e i s t he same as t he t est under t heSupr emacy Cl ause . . . f or pr e- empt i on of t he l aw of a St at e. " ) ;Ant i l l es Cement Corp. v. For t uo, 670 F. 3d 310, 323 ( 1st Ci r . 2012)( "For pr eempt i on pur poses, t he l aws of Puer t o Ri co ar e t hef unct i onal equi val ent of st at e l aws. ") .

-7-


8/23

ar gue that t he di st r i ct cour t ' s r eadi ng of t he SCA was over br oad,

and that t he SCA and t he Regi st r y Act do not r egul at e t he same

i nf or mat i on. Bef or e we pr oceed t o anal yze Appel l ant s' cl ai ms on

t he mer i t s, we begi n wi t h bi t of backgr ound on t he SCA.

A. The SCA

The SCA i s par t of t he El ect r oni c Communi cat i ons Pr i vacy

Act ( t he "ECPA") , whi ch was enact ed i n 1986 " t o update and cl ar i f y

Feder al pr i vacy pr ot ect i ons and st andar ds i n l i ght of dr amat i c

changes i n new comput er and t el ecommuni cat i ons t echnol ogi es. "

S. Rep. No. 99- 541, at 1- 2 ( 1986) . Ti t l e I I of t he ECPA i s t he

SCA, whi ch i mposes sever al r est r i ct i ons on t he abi l i t y of

communi cat i on servi ce pr ovi der s t o di vul ge cust omer i nf or mat i on t o

gover nment al ent i t i es.

I n per t i nent par t , t he SCA st at es t hat "a pr ovi der of

. . . el ect r oni c communi cat i on ser vi ce t o t he publ i c shal l not

knowi ngl y di vul ge a r ecor d or ot her i nf or mat i on per t ai ni ng t o a

subscr i ber t o or cust omer of such servi ce . . . t o any gover nment al

ent i t y, " unl ess an enumer at ed except i on appl i es. 4 18 U. S. C.

4 Except i ons to t hi s pr ohi bi t i on i ncl ude di scl osur es of cust omerr ecor ds t hat ar e: ( 1) aut hor i zed by 18 U. S. C. 2703, ( 2) consent edt o by t he cust omer or subscr i ber , ( 3) "necessar i l y i nci dent " t o

r ender ser vi ce or t o pr ot ect t he ser vi ce pr ovi der ' s r i ght s orpr oper t y, ( 4) pr ovi ded t o a gover nment al ent i t y i n emer gencyci r cumst ances " i nvol vi ng danger of deat h or ser i ous physi cali nj ur y, " ( 5) r el eased t o t he Nat i onal Cent er f or Mi ssi ng andExpl oi t ed Chi l dr en f ol l owi ng t he submi ssi on of a 2258A r epor t , or( 6) gi ven " t o any per son ot her t han a gover nment al ent i t y. " 18U. S. C. 2702( c) .

-8-


9/23

2702( a) ( 3) . I n i t s or i gi nal f or m, t he SCA di ct at ed t hat "[ a]

pr ovi der of el ect r oni c communi cat i on ser vi ce . . . shal l di scl ose

a r ecor d or ot her i nf or mat i on per t ai ni ng t o a subscr i ber t o or

cust omer of such servi ce ( not i ncl udi ng t he cont ent s of

communi cat i ons . . . ) t o a gover nment al ent i t y onl y when t he

gover nment al ent i t y [ uses a subpoena or obt ai ns a war r ant , cour t

or der , or subscr i ber consent ] . " ECPA, Pub. L. No. 99- 508, 201,

100 St at . 1848, 1862 ( 1986) ( codi f i ed as amended at 18 U. S. C.

2703(c)(1)).

I n 1994, t he SCA was amended i n par t so t hat di f f erent

t ypes of r ecor ds and subscr i ber i nf or mat i on woul d r ecei ve di f f er ent

l evel s of pr ot ect i on f r om di scl osur e. See Communi cat i ons

Assi st ance f or Law Enf orcement Act , Pub. L. No. 103- 414, 108 St at .

4279 ( 1994) . Whi l e t he i ni t i al ver si on of t he Act had al l owed l aw

enf or cement t o obt ai n subscr i ber i nf or mat i on and r ecor ds wi t h a

mere subpoena, af t er t he 1994 amendment , a subpoena i s suf f i ci ent

t o obt ai n onl y a l i mi t ed subset of r ecor ds and i nf or mat i on, l i ke a

cust omer ' s name, addr ess, phone number , l engt h of servi ce, bi l l i ng

i nf or mat i on, and cal l r ecor ds. 5 See 18 U. S. C. 2703( c) ( 2) . To

5 " [ W] hen t he gover nment al ent i t y uses an admi ni st r at i ve subpoenaaut hor i zed by a Feder al or St at e st at ut e or a Feder al or St at e

gr and j ur y or t r i al subpoena, " a ser vi ce pr ovi der shal l di scl osei t s cust omer ' s: "( A) name; ( B) addr ess; ( C) l ocal and l ong di st ancet el ephone connect i on r ecor ds, or r ecor ds of sessi on t i mes anddur at i ons; ( D) l engt h of ser vi ce ( i ncl udi ng st ar t dat e) and t ypesof ser vi ce ut i l i zed; ( E) t el ephone or i nst r ument number or ot hersubscr i ber number or i dent i t y . . . ; and ( F) means and sour ce ofpayment . . . . " 18 U. S. C. 2703( c) ( 2) .

-9-


10/23

obt ai n addi t i onal r ecor ds or subscr i ber i nf or mat i on, t he gover nment

must obt ai n a cour t or der , cust omer consent , or a war r ant . I d.

2703( c) ( 1) .

B. Preemption

Appel l ant s begi n by ar gui ng t hat t he Regi st r y Act i s

desi gned t o combat cr i mi nal extor t i on and t hus const i t ut es a

l egi t i mat e exer ci se of Puer t o Ri co' s pol i ce power . Accor di ngl y,

Appel l ant s cont end, we shoul d assume t hat t he Regi st r y Act i s not

super seded by f eder al l aw unl ess pr eempt i on was " ' t he cl ear and

mani f est pur pose of Congr ess. ' " Gr ant ' s Dai r y, 232 F. 3d at 14- 15

( quot i ng Ri ce v. Sant a Fe El evat or Cor p. , 331 U. S. 218, 230

( 1947) ) . Appel l ant s ar gue t hat no such pur pose i s mani f est ed by

t he SCA, because the SCA r egul ates onl y t r ansact i onal r ecords and

i nf or mat i on r el at ed t o communi cat i ons, not basi c subscr i ber

i nf or mat i on unt et her ed t o speci f i c communi cat i ons.

To suppor t t hi s cl ai m, Appel l ant s l ar gel y bypass t he t ext

of t he r el evant st at ut or y pr ovi si ons and i nst ead emphasi ze t he

st r uct ur e and t i t l es of t he ECPA. Appel l ant s f i r st poi nt t o t he

t i t l e of subsect i on 2703( c) , "[ r ] ecor ds concer ni ng el ect r oni c

communi cat i on ser vi ce or r emote comput i ng ser vi ce. " Appel l ant s

concl ude t hat t he phr ase " [ r ] ecor ds concer ni ng el ect r oni c

communi cat i on servi ce" r ef er s onl y t o communi cat i on- speci f i c

document s l i ke cal l r ecor ds. As pr oof , t hey ci t e t he t i t l e of t he

SCA, "St or ed Wi r e and El ect r oni c Communi cat i ons and Transact i onal

-10-


11/23

Recor ds Access. " Fr om t hi s t i t l e, Appel l ant s concl ude t hat

subsequent r ef er ences t o "r ecor ds" i n t he Act shoul d be r ead t o

r ef er onl y t o "t r ansact i onal r ecor ds. " Accor di ng t o Appel l ant s,

t he st r uct ur e and t i t l es used i n t he ECPA pr ove t hat t he SCA onl y

pr ot ect s wi r el ess communi cat i ons and t r ansact i onal r ecor ds

associ at ed wi t h t hose communi cat i ons, not a pr epai d phone

pur chaser ' s name, addr ess, and phone number . They cl ai m t hat t he

di st r i ct cour t er r ed by rel yi ng excl usi vel y on t he l anguage of

2703 t o f i nd conf l i ct pr eempt i on when i t ought t o have consi der ed

st at ut or y desi gn and l egi sl at i ve hi st or y.

Appel l ant s ar e cor r ect t hat "t he t i t l e of a st at ut e and

t he headi ng of a sect i on ar e t ool s avai l abl e f or t he r esol ut i on of

a doubt about t he meani ng of a st at ut e. " Al mendarez- Tor r es v.

Uni t ed St at es, 523 U. S. 224, 234 ( 1998) ( i nt er nal quot at i on mar ks

and ci t at i on omi t t ed) . As we have pr evi ousl y made cl ear , however ,

t ur ni ng t o t i t l es and sect i on headi ngs t o di vi ne t he meani ng of a

st at ut e i s a "pr act i ce [ t hat ] shoul d not be i ndul ged at t he expense

of t he t ext i t sel f . " Mass. Ass' n of Heal t h Mai nt . Or gs. v.

Rut har dt , 194 F. 3d 176, 180 ( 1st Ci r . 1999) ; Uni t ed St at es v.

Ozuna- Cabr er a, 663 F. 3d 496, 500 n. 3 ( 1st Ci r . 2011) ( " [ W] e do not

r el y on t he t i t l es of st at ut or y enact ment s i n pl umbi ng t hei r

meani ng . . . at t he expense of t he t ext i t sel f . " ( i nt er nal

quot at i on mar ks and ci t at i on omi t t ed) ) .

-11-


12/23

Her e, t he t ext of t he SCA i s abundant l y cl ear :

communi cat i ons ser vi ce pr ovi der s may not r el ease "a record or other

i nf or mat i on per t ai ni ng t o a subscr i ber t o or a cust omer of such

ser vi ce . . . t o any gover nment al ent i t y" wi t hout t he r equi si t e

pr ocess. 18 U. S. C. 2702 ( emphasi s added) . I f t her e was any

quest i on as t o whet her Congr ess i nt ended " r ecord or other

i nf or mat i on" t o ext end beyond t r ansact i onal r ecor ds t o i ncl ude

basi c subscr i ber i nf or mat i on l i ke a cust omer ' s name, addr ess, and

t el ephone number , 2703 r eadi l y answer s t he quest i on i n t he

af f i r mat i ve:

A gover nment al ent i t y may r equi r e a pr ovi derof el ect r oni c communi cat i on ser vi ce . . . t odi scl ose a r ecor d or ot her i nf or mat i onper t ai ni ng t o a subscr i ber t o or cust omer ofsuch ser vi ce ( not i ncl udi ng t he cont ent s ofcommuni cat i ons) onl y when t he gover nment alent i t y . . . [ seeki ng a cust omer ' s name,t el ephone number , et c. ] uses an admi ni st r at i vesubpoena aut hor i zed by a Feder al or St atest at ut e or a Feder al of St at e gr and j ur y ort r i al subpoena . . . .

I d. 2703( c) ( emphasi s added) . By i t s expr ess l anguage, t he SCA

does not l i mi t i t s pr ot ecti ons t o t r ansacti onal r ecor ds l i ke cal l

l ogs. " [ T] el ephone connect i on r ecor ds" ar e but one of s i x

speci f i cal l y enumer at ed t ypes of pr ot ect ed i nf or mat i on; a wi r el ess

servi ce cust omer ' s name, addr ess, l engt h of servi ce, t el ephone or

i nst r ument number , and means of payment are al so expl i ci t l y

pr ot ect ed by st at ut e and cannot be r el eased to a government al

ent i t y wi t hout a subpoena. I d. 2703( c) ( 2) .

-12-


13/23

Wher e t he t ext of a st at ut e i s cl ear , as i t i s her e, we

need not go on t o consi der t he act ' s l egi sl at i ve hi st or y t o di vi ne

Congr ess' s i nt ent . Ant i l l es Cement Cor p. , 670 F. 3d at 320 ( "We

must eval uate t he st atut e' s l anguage wi t hi n t he st atut ory scheme

and l ook t o t he l egi sl at i ve hi st or y and pol i cy onl y i f t hat

l anguage i s uncl ear . " ( emphasi s added) ) . Never t hel ess, i n an

abundance of caut i on, we wi l l pr oceed t o consi der br i ef l y

Appel l ant s' ar gument t hat our i nt er pr et at i on of t he st at ut e i s

cont r ary t o congr essi onal pur pose as evi denced by t he SCA' s

l egi sl at i ve hi st or y. See Rut har dt , 194 F. 3d at 184 ( "Al t hough

t ext ual anal ysi s r esol ves t he st at ut or y const r uct i on i ssue, we

somet i mes have l ooked t o l egi sl at i ve hi st or y to conf i r m t ext ual

i ntui t i ons. " ) .

Appel l ant s bel i eve t hat t he ECPA' s l egi sl at i ve hi st or y

conf i r ms t hat t he SCA was i nt ended t o regul at e onl y communi cat i ons

and t r ansact i onal r ecor ds r el at i ng t o t hose communi cat i ons. They

f i r st quot e an excer pt of a 1986 House J udi ci ary Commi t t ee Repor t

on t he bi l l t hat l ater became t he ECPA. The r epor t summar i zes t he

pur poses of t he Act , i n r el evant par t , as amendi ng t he Uni t ed

St at es Code "t o pr ovi de pr ocedur es f or i nt er cept i on of el ect r oni c

communi cat i ons by f eder al l aw enf orcement of f i cer s" and " t o pr ovi de

pr ocedur es f or access t o communi cat i ons r ecords by f eder al l aw

enf or cement of f i cer s. " H. R. Rep. No. 99- 647, at 16 ( 1986) .

-13-


14/23

Appel l ant ' s quot at i on does l i t t l e t o advance t he bal l .

The ECPA cer t ai nl y di d, among ot her t hi ngs, "pr ovi de pr ocedures f or

access t o communi cat i ons r ecor ds by f ederal l aw enf orcement

of f i cer s, " but t hat br oad summar y of a l engt hy bi l l does not

suggest an i nt ent cont r ar y t o t he pl ai n l anguage of 2703. I n

f act , t he l egi sl at i ve hi st or y of t he SCA cor r obor at es t he

congr essi onal pur pose made mani f est by t he st at ut ory t ext . When

Congr ess amended the SCA i n 1994, i t di d so - - i n par t - - by

di f f er ent i at i ng bet ween t ypes of subscr i ber i nf or mat i on t hat had

pr evi ousl y been t r eat ed i dent i cal l y under t he Act . See

Communi cat i ons Assi st ance f or Law Enf orcement Act , Pub. L. No. 103-

414, 108 St at . 4279 ( 1994) . As t he 1994 House J udi ci ary Commi t t ee

Repor t expl ai ned, t he amendment was "r ai si ng t he st andar d f or

access t o t r ansact i onal dat a . . . t o guar d agai nst ' f i shi ng

expedi t i ons' by l aw enf or cement , " but " [ l ] aw enf or cement coul d

st i l l use a subpoena t o obt ai n t he name, addr ess, t el ephone t ol l

bi l l i ng r ecor ds, and l engt h of ser vi ce of a subscri ber t o or

cust omer of such servi ce and the types of servi ces t he subscr i ber

or cust omer ut i l i zed. " H. R. Rep. No. 103- 827, at 31- 32 ( 1994) . I n

other words, Congr ess expr essl y r ecogni zed t he di f f er ence bet ween

t r ansact i onal dat a and basi c subscr i ber i nf or mat i on i n t he SCA,

af f or di ng t he l at t er l ess pr ot ect i on, but never t hel ess r equi r i ng a

subpoena pr i or t o i t s di scl osure t o l aw enf or cement .

-14-


15/23

Appel l ant s next poi nt out t hat t he Senat e J udi ci ar y

Commi t t ee Repor t cor r espondi ng t o t he ECPA st at ed t hat t he

def i ni t i on of "cont ent s" woul d not i ncl ude "t he i dent i t y of t he

par t i es or t he exi st ence of t he communi cat i on . . . or

t r ansact i onal r ecor ds about i t . " S. Rep. No. 99- 541, at 13. Thi s

def i ni t i on, Appel l ant s cont end, shows t hat Congr ess actual l y meant

"a t r ansact i onal r ecor d" when i t wr ot e "a r ecor d" i n t he SCA. We

di sagr ee. As an i ni t i al mat t er , t he f act t hat Congr ess knew how t o

i dent i f y a " t r ansact i onal r ecor d" but opt ed t o use br oader l anguage

i n 2703 "onl y under scor es our dut y t o r ef r ai n f r om r eadi ng a

phr ase i nt o t he st at ut e when Congr ess has l ef t i t out . " Keene

Cor p. v. Uni t ed St at es, 508 U. S. 200, 208 ( 1993) . Mor e t o t he

poi nt , t he ver y same Senat e Repor t speci f i cal l y st at es t hat

2703( c) "per mi t s t he pr ovi der of t he ser vi ce t o di vul ge, i n t he

nor mal cour se of busi ness, such i nf or mat i on as cust omer l i st s and

payment s t o anyone except a Gover nment agency. " S. Rep. No. 99-

541, at 38 ( emphasi s added) . That Congr ess i nt ended 2703 t o

r est r i ct t he abi l i t y of a ser vi ce pr ovi der t o t ur n over even a l i st

of cust omer s t o a gover nment al ent i t y i s t hus abundant l y cl ear .

Leavi ng no st one unt ur ned, Appel l ant s next r ef er us t o

st at ement s by i ndi vi dual l egi sl at ors who cosponsored ver si ons of

what became t he SCA i n 1986. Appel l ant s bel i eve t hat t hese

st at ement s show t hat t he sponsor s of t he SCA never i nt ended t o

pr ot ect basi c subscri ber i nf or mat i on di vor ced f r om par t i cul ar

-15-


16/23

communi cat i ons. That ef f or t i s doomed f r om t he st ar t . " [ T] he

over ar chi ng r ul e i s t hat st at ement s by i ndi vi dual l egi sl at or s

shoul d not be gi ven cont r ol l i ng ef f ect ; r at her , such st at ement s are

t o be respect ed onl y t o t he ext ent t hat t hey ar e consi st ent wi t h

t he st at ut or y l anguage. " Rhode I sl and v. Nar r aganset t I ndi an

Tr i be, 19 F. 3d 685, 699 ( 1st Ci r . 1994) ( i nt er nal quot at i on mar ks

and ci t at i on omi t t ed) . Thi s i s no l ess t r ue when t he st at ement s

come f r om a bi l l ' s sponsor s. I d.

Even i f we wer e i ncl i ned t o gi ve wei ght t o such

st at ement s, i n t hi s case, t hey of f er us no r eason t o bel i eve t hat

Congr ess i nt ended t he SCA t o f unct i on i n a manner cont r ary to i t s

expr ess t er ms. Appel l ant s poi nt out t hat a cosponsor of t he bi l l

st at ed dur i ng House del i ber at i ons t hat "t he l egi sl at i on est abl i shes

cl ear r ul es f or Gover nment access t o new f or ms of el ect r oni c

communi cat i ons as wel l as . . . t r ansact i onal r ecor ds r egar di ng

such communi cat i ons. " 132 Cong. Rec. H4039- 01 ( 1986) ( st at ement of

Rep. Car l os J . Moor head) , 1986 WL 776505, at *26. Once mor e,

Appel l ant s ar e endeavor i ng t o t r ansf or m a gener al summar y of a

det ai l ed Act i nt o a l i mi t at i on on i t s expr ess t er ms, and t he

st at ement r ef erenced si mpl y does not suppor t such a r eadi ng. Were

we t o accept Appel l ant s' vi ew of t he i mpor t of Repr esent at i ve

Moor ehead' s st at ement - - and we do not - - i t woul d st i l l do

Appel l ant s no f avor s, because "[ i ] n t he game of st at ut or y

i nt er pr et at i on, st at ut or y l anguage i s t he ul t i mat e t r ump car d, and

-16-


17/23

t he r emar ks of sponsor s of l egi sl at i on ar e aut hor i t at i ve onl y t o

t he ext ent t hat t hey ar e compat i bl e wi t h t he [ st at ut e' s] pl ai n

l anguage. " Uni t ed St at es v. Czubi nski , 106 F. 3d 1069, 1078 ( 1st

Ci r . 1997) ( i nt er nal quot at i on mar ks and ci t at i ons omi t t ed) .

Wi t h t he f or mi dabl e combi nat i on of cl ear st at ut or y t ext

and l egi sl at i ve hi st or y st acked agai nst t hem, Appel l ant s make one

f i nal ef f or t t o save t he Regi st r y Act , by poi nt i ng t o t he exi st ence

of t el ephone books. The names, numbers, and addr esses of l andl i ne

t el ephone owner s, Appel l ant s poi nt out , ar e r out i nel y publ i shed i n

t el ephone books that ar e publ i cl y di st r i but ed. I n f act , pr ovi der s

of t el ecommuni cat i ons servi ces ar e r equi r ed t o pr ovi de subscr i ber

l i st i nf or mat i on t o "any per son upon r equest f or t he pur pose of

publ i shi ng di r ect or i es i n any f or mat . " 47 U. S. C. 222( e) .

Sur el y, Appel l ant s r eason, Congr ess, i n passi ng t he SCA, di d not

i nt end t o under mi ne t he l ong- st andi ng t r adi t i on of l awf ul

di scl osur e of basi c subscr i ber i nf or mat i on i n t el ephone books.

Thi s ar gument f ai l s f or t wo r easons. Fi r st , t he Federal

Communi cat i ons Commi ss i on has exempted wi r el ess servi ce pr ovi der s

f r om 222( e) ' s di scl osur e r equi r ement s. I n r e I mpl ement at i on of

t he Tel ecommuni cat i ons Act of 1996: Tel ecommuni cat i ons Car r i ers'

Use of Cust omer Propr i etary Network I nf ormat i on and Ot her Cust omer

I nf ormat i on, 14 FCC Rcd. 15550, 15569 ( 1999) ( "A [ mobi l e ser vi ce]

pr ovi der . . . need not pr ovi de subscri ber l i st i nf or mat i on

r egar di ng i t s t el ephone exchange cust omer s t o request i ng di r ect or y

-17-


18/23

publ i sher s, except t o t he ext ent t he . . . pr ovi der . . . publ i shes

t hat i nf or mat i on, causes i t t o be publ i shed, or accept s i t f or

publ i cat i on i n any di r ect or y f or mat . " ) . Second, and mor e

cri t i cal l y, t he pr ovi si ons of t he SCA at i ssue i n t hi s case

pr ohi bi t wi r el ess ser vi ce pr ovi der s f r om di scl osi ng "a r ecor d or

ot her i nf or mat i on per t ai ni ng t o a subscri ber . . . t o any

gover nment al ent i t y, " 18 U. S. C. 2702 ( emphasi s added) , wi t hout

t he r equi si t e pr ocess, i d. 2703. Sect i on 2702 st at es t hat a

ser vi ce pr ovi der "may di vul ge a r ecor d or ot her i nf or mat i on

per t ai ni ng t o a subscr i ber . . . t o any per son ot her t han a

gover nment al ent i t y. " I d. 2702( c) . Accor di ngl y, whi l e t he SCA

pr ohi bi t s t he di scl osur e of cust omer l i st s t o gover nment ent i t i es

absent t he r equi si t e pr ocess, i t seemi ngl y al l ows f or t he

di scl osur e of t he same i nf ormat i on t o ot her non- gover nment al

ent i t i es l i ke pr i vat e publ i sher s. Whet her such di scl osur e i s i n

f act aut hor i zed by t he SCA i s a quest i on we need not answer t oday,

however , as t he case bef ore us concerns onl y t he compel l ed

di scl osur e of cust omer i nf or mat i on t o a gover nment al ent i t y.

We need go no f ur t her . I n sum, we f i nd t hat t he SCA

cl ear l y pr ohi bi t s communi cat i ons pr ovi der s f r om di scl osi ng t o t he

gover nment basi c subscr i ber i nf or mat i on - - i ncl udi ng a cust omer ' s

name, address, and t el ephone number - - wi t hout a subpoena. Because

t he Regi st r y Act r equi r es communi cat i ons provi der s who sel l pr epai d

phones i n Puer t o Ri co to di scl ose t hei r pr epai d cust omer s' names,

-18-


19/23

addr esses, and phone numbers t o a government al ent i t y wi t hout a

subpoena - - or any pr ocess what soever - - t he t wo act s di r ect l y

conf l i ct . The Regi st r y Act i s t hus pr eempt ed by t he SCA, and t he

di st r i ct cour t ' s or der enj oi ni ng t he enf or cement of t he Regi st r y

Act i s af f i r med.

III. Conclusion

We ar e not unsympat het i c t o the Puer t o Ri co gover nment ' s

desi r e t o combat t he expl oi t at i on of pr epai d phones f or cr i mi nal

pur poses. No mat t er how wor t hy t he obj ect i ve, however , any such

ef f or t cannot r un af oul of t he cl ear l anguage of f eder al l aw, whi ch

pl ai nl y f or bi ds t he di scl osur e of subscri ber i nf or mat i on t o a

government al ent i t y wi t hout a subpoena.

The j udgment of t he di st r i ct cour t i s t hus af f i r med.

AFFIRMED.

-19-


20/23

APPENDIX

AN ACT

To cr eat e a r egi st er of pr e- pai d t el ephone numbers, assi gned t o t heTel ecommuni cat i ons Regul at or y Boar d of Puer t o Ri co, t o empower t heBoar d t o est abl i sh t he r el evant r egul at i ons and det er mi nepenal t i es, and f or r el at ed pur poses.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

The use of pr e- pai d mobi l e t el ephone uni t s has emer ged i nPuer t o Ri co as t he way t o ext or t money f r omcer t ai n i ndi vi dual s. I ti s i ncr easi ngl y common f or t he medi a to poi nt out t hat var i ousi ndi vi dual s, usi ng pr e- pai d cel l ul ar t el ephones ext or t peopl e bydecept i on, t el l i ng t hem t hey ar e goi ng t o ki dnap or ki l l a f ami l ymember , unl ess t hey pr ovi de a cer t ai n amount of money. I t has comet o l i ght t hat many of t hese cal l s are made f r om t he penali nst i t ut i ons of t he count r y, usi ng cel l ul ar t el ephones t hat havebeen smuggl ed i nt o t he pr i sons.

The pr obl em i s t hat t he owners of t hese mobi l e uni t s,because t hey ar e pr e- pai d, ar e not r egi st er ed by t he var i ouscompani es, maki ng i t i mpossi bl e f or t he aut hor i t i es t o t r ack downt hei r owner s, i f an i nci dent of ext or t i on occur s.

I ndeed, many cust omer s pur chase t hi s t ype of uni t t oavoi d bei ng t i ed t o t he cont r act s i mposed by t he cel l ul ar t el ephonecompani es or because t hey si mpl y can speci f y t he ser vi ces t hey

r eal l y need.However , because of t he wi despr ead use of t hi s t ype ofdevi ce t o commi t cr i mes, i t i s i mper at i ve t o pr ovi de t heTel ecommuni cat i ons Regul at or y Boar d of Puer t o Ri co wi t h t he powert o cr eat e a r egi st er of pr e- pai d mobi l e uni t s as a met hod ofpr ot ecti on and secur i t y f or al l r esi dent s of t hi s I sl and.

The Tel ecommuni cat i ons Regul at or y Boar d, an agencycr eat ed by Act No. 213 of 1996, as amended, known as t he "Puer t oRi co Tel ecommuni cat i ons Act of 1996, " [ Ley de Tel ecomuni caci ones dePuer t o Ri co de 1996] i s t he gover nment agency char ged wi t hr egul at i ng t el ecommuni cat i ons ser vi ces i n Puer t o Ri co.

Recogni zi ng t hat t he pr ovi si on of t el ecommuni cat i ons

ser vi ce i s i nt ended t o pr omot e t he publ i c i nt er est , wi t hi n acompet i t i ve market , and t hat t he Boar d has t he power t o regul ateser vi ce pr ovi der s i n a manner consi st ent wi t h t hei r mar ket posi t i onand t he i nf l uence they have over consumer s, t hi s Legi sl atur e deemsi t appr opr i at e t o pl ace t he r esponsi bi l i t y f or t hi s Act i n t hehands of t he Tel ecommuni cat i ons Regul at ory Boar d.

-20-


21/23

ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF PUERTO RICO:

Sect i on 1. Cr eat i onA r egi st er of pr e- pai d t el ephone number s assi gned to t he

Tel ecommuni cat i ons Boar d i s hereby cr eat ed.

Secti on 2. Def i ni t i onsFor pur poses of t hi s Act , t he f ol l owi ng t er ms shal l have

t he meani ngs st at ed bel ow:( a) Boar d The Tel ecommuni cat i ons Regul at ory Boar d ofPuer t o Ri co, t he agency char ged wi t h r egul at i ngt el ecommuni cat i ons ser vi ces i n Puer t o Ri co, pur suant t ot he pr ovi si ons of Act No. 213 of 1996, as amended, knownas t he "Puer t o Ri co Tel ecommuni cat i ons Act of 1996. "( b) Tel ephone company any natur al or l egal per son t hatowns, cont r ol s, admi ni st er s, oper at es, manages, suppl i es,or r esel l s, i n whol e or par t , di r ect l y or i ndi r ect l y, anyt el ephone ser vi ce i n Puer t o Ri co.( c) Commer ci al Ent i t i es any nat ur al or l egal per son orbusi ness est abl i shment , such as phar maci es, gas st at i ons,depar t ment st or es and super mar ket s t hat sel l pr e- pai dwi r el ess t el ephones.( d) Owner t he natur al or l egal per son or company t hatowns or cont r ol s a pr epai d mobi l e t el ephone uni t .( e) Pr e- pai d mobi l e t el ephone uni t any t el ephone orot her equi pment used t o make t el ephone or comput ercommuni cat i on vi a t he cel l ul ar communi cat i ons net workst hat has been assi gned a t el ephone number t o be act i vat edt hr ough a tel ephone ser vi ce pr ovi der ; i t i ncl udesi nt er changeabl e Subscr i ber I dent i f i cat i on Modul es ( SI M,f or i t s acronym i n Engl i sh) t hat ser ve t o act i vat e andconnect t he comput er t o a net wor k, when t hey ar e assi gneda tel ephone number , whet her acqui r ed j oi nt l y orsepar at el y f r om other equi pment .

Sect i on 3. Aut hor i zat i on and Power s of t he Boar dFor pur poses of t he r egi st r at i on of pr e- pai d mobi l e

t el ephone number s t o be cr eat ed i n accor dance wi t h Ar t i cl e I I - 6 ofAct No. 213 of 1996, as amended, t he Boar d shal l have or i gi nalj ur i sdi ct i on over al l t el ecommuni cat i ons ser vi ces and al l personspr ovi di ng t hese ser vi ces wi t hi n t he Commonweal t h of Puer t o Ri co and

over any per son wi t h a di r ect or i ndi r ect i nt er est i n such ser vi cesor compani es. Thi s shal l i ncl ude any busi ness ent i t y t hat sel l spr e- pai d mobi l e t el ephones.

The Boar d i s aut hor i zed and empower ed t o i mpl ement t hi sAct and ensur e f ul l and st r i ct compl i ance t her ewi t h.

The r egi st r at i on i nf or mat i on t o be cr eat ed shal l onl y beavai l abl e t o l aw enf or cement agenci es t hat r equest i t , i f t hey ar e

-21-


22/23

car r yi ng out an i nvest i gat i on i nt o t he commi ssi on of a cr i me. TheBoar d shal l submi t t he i nf ormat i on at no cost and upon submi ssi onof a pol i ce compl ai nt or an or der i ssued by a cour t wi t hj ur i sdi ct i on i n Puer t o Ri co.

Sect i on 4. Obl i gat i on t o Regul at e

Member s of t he Boar d shal l enact , wi t hi n a per i od ofni net y ( 90) days af t er t he passage of t hi s Act , t he r egul at i onst hat ar e necessary t o est abl i sh, among ot her t hi ngs, al l r ul es andst andar ds r el at i ng t o t he ef f ect i ve enf or cement of t hi s Act . TheseRul es and Regul at i ons shal l be adopt ed i n accordance wi t h Act No.170 of August 12, 1988, as amended, known as t he "Uni f or mAdmi ni st r at i ve Procedur e Act of t he Commonweal t h of Puer t o Ri co, "[ Ley de Pr ocedi mi ent o Admi ni st r at i vo Uni f or me del Est ado Li br eAsoci ado de Puer t o Ri co] and, i mmedi at el y af t er appr oval , shal l behoused i n t he Depar t ment of St ate of Puer t o Ri co.

Sect i on 5. Regi st er of number s of pr e- pai d mobi l e t el ephones;obl i gat i on t o r egi st er t he number s f al l s on t he Boar d

The Boar d i s r esponsi bl e f or keepi ng and mai nt ai ni ng anup- t o- dat e r egi st er of al l t el ephone number s of pr e- pai d mobi l euni t s sol d i n Puer t o Ri co, as pr ovi ded f or i n t hi s Act . Ther egi st er t o be kept i n t hi s agency shal l i ncl ude t he name and t hephysi cal and post al addr ess of t he owner of t he uni t and anal t er nat i ve t el ephone number , t he number of t he uni t , i t s make,model , and ser i al number .

Ever y t el ephone company, nat ur al or l egal person, orbusi ness ent i t y that sel l s a pr e- pai d mobi l e t el ephone uni t shal lr equi r e phot o i dent i f i cat i on at t he t i me of pur chase and shal lr egi st er wi t h the Boar d the name and physi cal and post al addr ess oft he owner of t he uni t and an al t er nat i ve t el ephone number , t henumber of t he uni t , i t s make, model , and ser i al number .Regi st r at i on wi l l t ake pl ace wi t hi n t hi r t y ( 30) days of t heacqui si t i on of t he uni t . The pr ocedur es i ncl uded i n t he r egul at i onsi t adopt s, as set f or t h i n t hi s Act.

Any t el ephone company t hat has sol d pr e- pai d mobi l et el ephone uni t s pr i or t o t he ef f ect i ve per i od of t hi s Act shal l ber equi r ed t o submi t t o t he Boar d a l i st of t el ephone number s oft hese uni t s, and any ot her i nf or mat i on i t has t hat i s r equi r ed f orpur poses of t he r egi st er est abl i shed under t hi s Act , or whi ch i tmay have acqui r ed i n t he cour se of i t s busi ness, wi t hi n t hi r t y ( 30)

days f ol l owi ng t he dat e of ent r y i nt o f or ce her eof .I n t he case of t hose per sons, who upon appr oval of t hi sAct , have i n t hei r possessi on a pr e- pai d mobi l e uni t , a t er mnot t oexceed si xt y ( 60) days i s est abl i shed t o regi st er t he same wi t h t heBoar d. The Boar d i s empower ed t o ext end t hi s per i od f or up t o si xt y( 60) addi t i onal days i f i t so deems f i t .

-22-


23/23

Sect i on 6. Dut y t o not i f y i n case of change of addr essI t shal l be t he dut y of ever y owner of a pr e- pai d mobi l e

t el ephone uni t t o not i f y t he Boar d of any change of addr ess t hatt akes pl ace wi t hi n t hi r t y ( 30) days f ol l owi ng same.

Sect i on 7. Dut y of not i f i cat i on i n t he case of a new owner

I t shal l be t he dut y of ever y nat ur al or l egal per son t ogi ve not i ce t o the Boar d i f a pr epai d mobi l e tel ephone uni t ,pr evi ousl y r egi st er ed by a pr evi ous owner , has been acqui r ed ei t hert hr ough pur chase or gi f t f r om anot her nat ur al or l egal per son,wi t hi n t hi r t y ( 30) days f ol l owi ng t he acqui si t i on.

Sect i on 8. Penal t i esAny t el ephone company, natur al or l egal per son, or

busi ness ent i t y t hat commi t s a vi ol at i on of t he pr ovi si ons of t hi sAct , shal l commi t an admi ni st r at i ve of f ense, puni shabl e by a f i neof up t o t went y- f i ve t housand ( 25, 000) dol l ar s f or each vi ol at i on.

Ar t i cl e 9. Speci al FundThe moni es t hat ar e col l ect ed by way of admi ni st r at i ve

f i nes i mposed under t hi s Act or t he regul at i ons t her eunder shal l bepai d i nt o a Tel ecommuni cat i ons Regul atory Boar d Speci al Fund,wi t hout bei ng subj ect t o the publ i c pol i cy cont ai ned i n Act No. 230of J ul y 23, 1974, as amended, known as t he "Puer t o Ri co Gover nmentAccount i ng Act " [ Ley de Cont abi l i dad del Gobi er no de Puer t o Ri co] .

The money pai d i nt o t he Fund shal l be t r ansf er r ed t o t heBoar d t o be used t o cover par t of i t s oper at i ng, f i scal andadmi ni st r at i ve expenses i n t he i mpl ement at i on of t hi s Act .

Ar t i cl e l 0. Savi ng Cl auseI f any sect i on, subsect i on, par agr aph, subpar agr aph,

cl ause, phr ase or par t of t hi s Act i s decl ar ed i nval i d orunconst i t ut i onal by a cour t of compet ent j ur i sdi ct i on, t he r ul i ngt o t hat ef f ect shal l not af f ect , i mpai r or i nval i dat e t he r emai nderof t hi s Act, i t s ef f ects bei ng l i mi t ed onl y t o t he secti on,subsect i on, par agr aph, subpar agr aph, cl ause, phr ase or par t of t hi sAct so decl ar ed i nval i d or unconst i t ut i onal .

Ar t i cl e 11. Dat e of ent r y i nt o f or ceThi s Act shal l enter i nt o f or ce ni nety ( 90) days af t er i t

has been passed.

-23-

CTIA - The Wireless Assoc. v. PR Telecommunications Regul., 1st Cir. (2014)

Documents

Transcript of CTIA - The Wireless Assoc. v. PR Telecommunications Regul., 1st Cir. (2014)