In December of 2006 Horizon Communications and Bright Communications filed a motion for contempt against Sprint Nextel. On January 3 2007 that motion was denied. Here is the iPCS SEC filing…
On December 11, 2006, Horizon Personal Communications, Inc. and Bright Personal Communications Services, LLC, wholly owned subsidiaries of the Registrant (collectively, the “Horizon Entities”), filed a Motion For Contempt (the “Motion”) against Sprint Corporation, WirelessCo L.P., Sprint Spectrum L.P., SprintCom, Inc., Sprint Communications Company L.P., Nextel Communications, Inc., PhillieCo L.P. and APC PCS LLC (collectively, “Sprint”) in the Court of Chancery in the State of Delaware (the “Court of Chancery”).
The Motion alleged that Sprint is violating the Court of Chancery’s September 7, 2006 Final Order and Judgment (the “Final Order”) by offering iDEN products and services using the Sprint brand and marks or marks confusingly similar to those marks, including “Sprint,” “Sprint Business Essentials” and “Fair & Flexible.” The Motion requested that the Court of Chancery enter an order finding Sprint in contempt of the Final Order and directing Sprint to cease and desist from violating the Final Order.
On January 3, 2007, a hearing on the Motion was held in the Court of Chancery before Vice Chancellor Parsons. Vice Chancellor Parsons denied the Motion without limiting the Horizon Entities’ right to seek clarification of the Final Order or pursue additional relief with respect to Sprint’s use of certain brands and marks (such as “Fair & Flexible”) to offer iDEN products and services in the Horizon Entities’ service area. The Horizon Entities are considering their next steps with respect to this matter.