[citation needed] In January 2010, Sprint filed a complaint with the Iowa Utilities Board (IUB) requesting a declaration that it was proper to withhold VoIP access charges.

[citation needed] In February 2011, the IUB issued an order with its own interpretation of VoIP’s classification under federal law along with a determination that Sprint was liable to Windstream for the access charges.

[5] Sprint then filed suit against the board in both federal district court (seeking a declaration that the Telecommunications Act preempted the board's decision and seeking an injunction against enforcement) and state court (reiterating the preemption argument, and asserting state law and procedural due process claims).

[citation needed] The federal district court dismissed the case because of the pending state suit and ruled that the Younger abstention applied.

[6][better source needed] On appeal, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the abstention, vacated the dismissal, and remanded the case to the district court and ordered it enter a stay during the pendency of the state-court proceedings.