The single issue presented in this case is whether the FCC reasonably determined that DTE did not “fail[] to act to carry out its responsibility” to adjudicate the dispute between GNAPs and Verizon over whether ISP-bound calls are “local” within the meaning of their interconnection agreement. Only where there is such a failure does § 252(e)(5) obligate the Commission to step in. Otherwise - such as where the state agency actually “makes a determination” under § 252 - there is no statutory basis for FCC preemption. Under such circumstances, an aggrieved party may bring an action for judicial review in federal court under § 252(e)(6), or, if that provision is inapplicable and there is no federal question at issue, in state court. Cf. Verizon Md., — U.S. at -, 122 S.Ct. at 1758-60 (<HOLDING>). Section 252(e)(6), entitled “Review of State
holding that federal courts have original rather than supplemental jurisdiction to review state public service commissions application of state law in interpreting an interconnection agreement recognizing that decisions of lower federal courts interpreting federal law are not binding on state courts holding that state courts in construing and interpreting state law are not bound by the decisions of federal courts holding that federal courts have jurisdiction to review decisions of state commissions interpreting interconnection agreements at least where review turns on issues of federal law and that this jurisdiction is not stripped by  252e6 holding that federal district courts lack jurisdiction to review a final state court decision in a particular case