## Facts

- Federal Express Corporation (FedEx), an air carrier and delivery company, and the United States Postal Service (USPS) were engaged in litigation involving allegedly false or misleading comparative advertising about delivery services.
- USPS asserted a counterclaim under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act of 1977 (TCPA), alleging FedEx engaged in false and misleading comparative advertising about USPS’s service performance.
- FedEx moved to dismiss USPS’s TCPA counterclaim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), arguing the claim was preempted by the Airline Deregulation Act (ADA), 49 U.S.C. § 41713(b).
- USPS argued its TCPA theory targeted false statements about USPS (a non-air-carrier) and therefore did not regulate, and should not be preempted as relating to, an air carrier’s prices, routes, or services.

## Issues

1. Whether the ADA’s express preemption clause, 49 U.S.C. § 41713(b), preempts a TCPA counterclaim challenging an air carrier’s comparative advertising as false or misleading when the advertisements concern a competitor’s services.

## Decision

- The court granted FedEx’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion and dismissed USPS’s TCPA counterclaim.
- The court held the ADA preempted the state-law consumer-protection claim because it was “related to” an air carrier’s services within the meaning of § 41713(b).
- The court rejected USPS’s attempt to avoid preemption by characterizing the claim as solely about the falsity of statements concerning USPS’s services.
- Applying the Rule 12(b)(6) standard, the court concluded that even assuming USPS’s factual allegations were true, federal preemption barred relief as a matter of law.

## Legal Principles

- Under 49 U.S.C. § 41713(b), states may not enforce a “law, regulation, or other provision having the force and effect of law related to a price, route, or service of an air carrier.”
- ADA preemption is construed broadly; a state-law claim is preempted if it has a connection with or reference to an air carrier’s prices, routes, or services, even if the law is generally applicable.
- State consumer-protection statutes, as applied through private litigation, can function as state regulation when they impose state standards on an air carrier’s advertising about its service attributes.
- A claim directed at comparative advertising may be preempted where adjudication would constrain how an air carrier may describe and compete based on service quality, including comparisons to competitors.

## Conclusion

The court dismissed USPS’s TCPA counterclaim because applying state consumer-protection law to police FedEx’s comparative advertising would impose state-law constraints connected to an air carrier’s services, a result barred by the Airline Deregulation Act’s express preemption clause.


Federal Express Corp. v. United States Postal Serv., 55 F. Supp. 2d 813 (W.D. Tenn. 1999)