on FCC discussions of permissive detariffing as permitting off-tariff contracts fails for the same reasons. Permissive detariffing permits carriers to file tariffs and thus be bound by the rate established therein or, alternatively, to negotiate separate agreements in lieu of, or rather than, filing tariffs. See Hyperion, Hyperion Telecomms., Inc., 12 FCC Rcd 8596, at ¶27 (1997); 47 U.S.C. § 211(a); see also Second Order on Reconsideration and Erratum, Policy and Rules Concerning the Interstate, Interexchange Marketplace, 14 FCC Rcd 6004 at ¶ 2 (1999) (stating that one of the reasons to move toward a complete or permissive detariffing regime is to avoid the "potentially harsh consequences of the filed-rate doctrine”). 25 . See Central Office Tel., 524 U.S. at 226, 118 S.Ct. 1956 (<HOLDING>); Fax Telecommunicaciones Inc. v. AT & T, 138
recognizing that the elements of a claim for breach of contract are 1 existence of a valid contract and 2 breach of the terms of that contract holding party in breach could not maintain suit for breach of contract holding that a filed tariff bars a breach of contract claim for privileges not included in the tariff holding that trial court erred by dismissing breach of contract claim because appellee made promises to perform specific acts in contract the breach of which would give rise to a breach of contract action holding that a fundamental breach bars assertion of any further rights under the contract by the party guilty of the breach