Common use of PROCEDURAL HISTORY Clause in Contracts

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 3, 2005, and pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“SBC Illinois”) and Cordia Communications Corp. (“Cordia”), filed a joint petition for approval of a 3rd Amendment to their interconnection agreement (“Amendment”), that is dated October 24, 2005, and governed by Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Amendment itself was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the instant petition was also filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. on behalf of SBC Illinois, and by Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx on behalf of Xxxxxx, stating that the facts contained in the petition are, to the best of their knowledge, information and belief, true and correct. At the early onset of this case, Staff filed the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst in the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. In his written statement, Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended the approval of the Amendment. The Administrative Law Judge waived the hearing in this matter and, by ruling, admitted the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx into evidence and marked the record “Heard and Taken” on November 30, 2005. See Notice of Ruling (12-1-05).

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 3July 11, 20052008, and pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“SBC AT&T Illinois”) and Cordia Norlight, Inc. d/b/a Cinergy Communications Corp. (“CordiaNorlight”), filed a joint petition for approval of a 3rd the 4th Amendment to their interconnection agreement the Interconnection Agreement dated July 2, 2008 (“AmendmentAgreement”), that is dated October 24, 2005, and governed by ) under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 252 et seq.) (“the Act”). The 4th Amendment itself to the Agreement was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the instant petition was also filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. on behalf of SBC Illinois, AT&T Illinois and by Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx Xxxx Xxxxxx on behalf of XxxxxxNorlight, stating that the facts contained in the petition are, are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information information, and belief. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, true and correctthis matter came on for hearing by the duly authorized Administrative Law Judge at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on August 14, 2008. At the early onset of this case, Staff previously filed the Verified Statement of A. X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst in Xxxxxxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications DivisionDivision on August 13, 2008. In his written statementAt the hearing on August 14, 2008, Norlight did not appear. AT&T Illinois and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Subsequently Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended the approval of the Amendment. The Administrative Law Judge waived the hearing in this matter and, by ruling, admitted the Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx was admitted into evidence and marked the record was marked “Heard and Taken” on November 30, 2005. See Notice of Ruling (12-1-05).”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 3May 16, 20052008, and pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“SBC AT&T Illinois”) and Cordia Vertex Broadband, Corp. d/b/a AthenaTel d/b/a Reason to Switch d/b/a TownLink Communications Corp. d/b/a INT Connections (“CordiaVertex”), filed a joint petition for approval of a 3rd Amendment to their interconnection agreement (“Amendment”)the Interconnection Agreement dated May 7, that is dated October 24, 2005, and governed by 2008 under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Amendment itself Agreement was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the instant petition was also filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. on behalf of SBC Illinois, AT&T Illinois and by Xxxxxx X. Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx on behalf of XxxxxxVertex, stating that the facts contained in the petition are, are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information information, and belief. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, true and correctthis matter came on for hearing by the duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on June 9, 2008. At the early onset of this case, Staff filed the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst in Xxxxxxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications DivisionDivision on June 6, 2008. In his written statementAt the hearing on June 9, 2008, AT&T Illinois, Vertex and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended the approval of the Amendment. The Administrative Law Judge waived the hearing in this matter and, by ruling, admitted the Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx was admitted into evidence and marked the record was marked “Heard and Taken” on November 30, 2005. See Notice of Ruling (12-1-05).”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 3February 9, 2005, and pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“SBC IllinoisSBC”) and Cordia Communications Corp. CenturyTel Fiber Company II, LLC (“CordiaCenturyTel”), filed a joint petition for approval of a 3rd the Second Amendment to their interconnection agreement the parties’ Interconnection Agreement dated February 2, 2005 (“Amendment”), that is dated October 24, 2005, and governed by under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Amendment itself was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the instant petition was also filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. ., on behalf of SBC IllinoisSBC, and by Xxxxx Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx, on behalf of XxxxxxCenturyTel, stating that the facts contained in the petition are, to the best of their knowledge, information and belief, are true and correct. At the early onset of this caseOn March 21, 2005, Staff filed the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst in X. Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. In his written statement, Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended Pursuant to the approval rules and regulations of the Amendment. The Commission, this matter was assigned to a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge waived (“ALJ”) of the hearing Commission. The ALJ determined that there were no disputed issues in this proceeding and that no evidentiary hearings would be required. This matter and, by ruling, admitted the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx into evidence and was marked the record “Heard and Taken” on November 30April 6, 2005. See Notice of Ruling (12-1-05).

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 3June 30, 20052009, and pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“SBC AT&T Illinois”) and Cordia Matrix Telecom, Inc. d/b/a Matrix Business Technologies d/b/a Trinsic Communications Corp. (“CordiaMatrix”), filed a joint petition for approval of a 3rd the 11th Amendment to their interconnection agreement (“Amendment”)the Interconnection Agreement dated June 19, that is dated October 24, 2005, and governed by 2009 pursuant to Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 252 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Amendment itself to the Agreement was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the instant petition was also filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. on behalf of SBC Illinois, AT&T Illinois and by Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx on behalf of XxxxxxMatrix, stating that the facts contained in the petition are, are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information information, and belief. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, true and correctthis matter came on for hearing by the duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on July 29, 2009. At the early onset of this case, Staff previously filed the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst in Xxxxxxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications DivisionDivision on July 15, 2009. In his written statementAt the hearing on July 29, 2009, Xxxxxx did not appear. AT&T Illinois and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Subsequently Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended the approval of the Amendment. The Administrative Law Judge waived the hearing in this matter and, by ruling, admitted the Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx was admitted into evidence and marked the record was marked “Heard and Taken” on November 30, 2005. See Notice of Ruling (12-1-05).”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 3October 22, 20052012, and pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, USCOC of Central Illinois, LLC, USCOC of Illinois Bell RSA #4, LLC, and United States Cellular Operating Company of Chicago, LLC (“USCOC”) and Illinois Consolidated Telephone Company (“SBC Illinois”) and Cordia Communications Corp. (“CordiaICTC”), filed a joint petition for approval of a 3rd the Negotiated First Amendment to their interconnection agreement (“Amendment”), that is dated October 24, 2005, and governed by an Interconnection Agreement under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ §151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Amendment itself was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the instant joint petition was also filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx on behalf of SBC Illinois, ICTC and by Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx on behalf of XxxxxxUSCOC, stating that the facts contained in the petition are, are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information information, and belief. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, true and correctthis matter came on for hearing by a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 15, 2012. At the early onset of this case, Staff filed the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst in Xxxxxxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. In his written statementAt the hearing on November 15, ICTC and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended the approval of the Amendment. The Administrative Law Judge waived the hearing in this matter and, by ruling, admitted the Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx was admitted into evidence and marked the record was marked “Heard and Taken” on November 30, 2005. See Notice of Ruling (12-1-05).”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 322, 20052000, and pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“SBC Ameritech Illinois”) and Cordia Communications Corp. Vectris Telecom, Inc. (“CordiaVectris”), filed a joint petition requests for approval of a 3rd the First Amendment to their interconnection agreement Interconnection Agreement dated September 27, 2000 and the Second Amendment to Interconnection Agreement dated October 11, 2000 (the “AmendmentAgreements”), that is dated October 24, 2005, and governed by Section under §§ 252 (a)(1) 252(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 151, et seq.) (“the Act”). The Amendment itself was Agreements were submitted with the petitionrequests. A statement in support of the instant petition each request was also filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. XxxxXxxxxx, Xx. on behalf of SBC Ameritech Illinois, and by Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx X. Xxxxxxx, on behalf of XxxxxxVectris, stating that the facts contained in the petition are, to the best of their knowledge, information and belief, request for approval are true and correct. At Pursuant to notice as required by law and the early onset rules and regulations of the Commission, this casematter came on for hearing by a duly authorized Hearing Examiner of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on January 11, 2001. Staff filed the Verified Statement Statements of Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx and A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst in Dockets 00-0753 and 00-0754 respectively, of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division, which were admitted into evidence. In his written statement, Xx. Xxxxxxx and Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended the approval of the AmendmentAgreements. The Administrative Law Judge waived At the hearing hearing, Staff indicated that there were no unresolved issues in this matter andproceeding, by ruling, admitted the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx into evidence and marked the record was marked “Heard and Taken” on November 30, 2005. See Notice of Ruling (12-1-05).”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 3June 10, 20052008, and pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“SBC AT&T Illinois”) and Cordia Communications Corp. CenturyTel Fiber Company II, LLC d/b/a LightCore, a CenturyTel Company (“CordiaCenturyTel”), filed a joint petition for approval of a 3rd Amendment to their interconnection agreement (“Amendment”)the Interconnection Agreement dated May 23, that is dated October 24, 2005, and governed by 2008 under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Amendment itself Agreement was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the instant petition was also filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. on behalf of SBC Illinois, AT&T Illinois and by Xxxxxx X. Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx on behalf of XxxxxxXxxxxxxXxx, stating that the facts contained in the petition are, are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information information, and belief. On July 2, true and correct2008, the parties filed a Joint Motion to Correct the Statement in Support of the Joint Petition. At the early onset of this case, Staff filed the Verified Statement of A. X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst in Xxxxxxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications DivisionDivision on July 9, 2008. In his written statement, Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended Pursuant to notice as required by law and the approval rules and regulations of the AmendmentCommission, this matter came on for hearing by the duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on July 14, 2008. At the hearing on July 14, 2008, XxxxxxxXxx did not appear. The Administrative Law Judge waived granted the hearing Joint Motion in Support. AT&T Illinois and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no other unresolved issues in this matter and, by ruling, admitted the proceeding. Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx was admitted into evidence and marked the record was marked “Heard and Taken” on November 30, 2005. See Notice of Ruling (12-1-05).”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 3August 19, 2005, and pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“SBC Illinois”) and Cordia XO Communications Corp. Services, Inc. (“CordiaXO Communications”), filed a joint petition for approval of a 3rd 12th Amendment to their interconnection agreement (“Amendment”), that is dated October 24August 10, 2005, and governed by Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Amendment itself was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the instant petition was also filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. on behalf of SBC Illinois, and by Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx Xxxx Xxxxxx on behalf of XxxxxxXO Communications , stating that the facts contained in the petition are, to the best of their knowledge, information and belief, true and correct. At Pursuant to notice as required by law and the early onset rules and regulations of the Commission, this casematter was scheduled for hearing by a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on September 7, 2005. Prior to this hearing date, Staff filed the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst in the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. In his written statement, Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended the approval of the Amendment. The Administrative Law Judge waived the hearing in this matter and, by ruling, admitted the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx into evidence and marked the record “Heard and Taken” on November 30September 6 , 2005. See ALJ Notice of Ruling (129-16-05).

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 3December 23, 20052002, and pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“SBC Ameritech Illinois”) and Cordia Communications Corp. Cook Inlet/Voicestream Operating Company, LLC, By Voicestream PCS BTA 1 Corporation, its agent, and Voicestream Wireless Corporation (collectively “CordiaVoicestream”), filed a joint petition Petition for approval of a 3rd the Fourth Amendment to their interconnection agreement the Interconnection Agreement dated November 18, 2002 (the “Amendment”), that is dated October 24, 2005, and governed by under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (the “the Act”). The Amendment itself was submitted with the petitionPetition. A statement in support of the instant petition Petition was also filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. Xxxx Xxxxxx on behalf of SBC Ameritech Illinois, and by Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx Xxx Xxxxxx on behalf of XxxxxxVoicestream, stating that the facts contained in the petition are, Petition are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information information, and belief, true and correct. At the early onset of this case, Illinois Commerce Commission Staff filed the Verified Statement of A. X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst in of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. In his written statement, Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended Pursuant to notice as required by law and the approval rules and regulations of the Amendment. The Commission, this matter came on for hearing before a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge waived of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on January 7, 2003. Counsel for Ameritech Illinois and Staff appeared at the hearing and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this matter and, by ruling, admitted the proceeding. The Verified Statement of A. X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx was admitted into evidence and marked the record was marked “Heard and Taken” on November 30, 2005. See Notice of Ruling (12-1-05).”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 3August 22, 2005, and pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“SBC Illinois”) and Cordia Communications Corp. IDT America, Corp (“CordiaIDT America”), filed a joint petition for approval of a 3rd 2nd Amendment to their interconnection agreement (“Amendment”), that is dated October 24August 10, 2005, and governed by Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Amendment itself was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the instant petition was also filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. Xxxx on behalf of SBC Illinois, and by Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx on behalf of XxxxxxIDT America, stating that the facts contained in the petition are, to the best of their knowledge, information and belief, true and correct. At Pursuant to notice as required by law and the early onset rules and regulations of the Commission, this casematter was scheduled for hearing by a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on September 14, 2005. Prior to this hearing date, Staff filed the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst in the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. In his written statement, Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended the approval of the Amendment. The Administrative Law Judge waived the hearing in this matter and, by ruling, admitted the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx into evidence and marked the record “Heard and Taken” on November 30September 13, 2005. See ALJ Notice of Ruling (129-113-05).

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 3October 1, 20052001, and pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“SBC Ameritech Illinois”) and Cordia Communications Corp. Telseon Carrier Services, Inc. (“CordiaTelseon”) filed a joint request for approval of the negotiated Interconnection Agreement dated August 14, 2001 (the “Agreement”), filed a joint petition for approval of a 3rd Amendment to their interconnection agreement under Sections 252(a)(1) and (“Amendment”), that is dated October 24, 2005, and governed by Section 252 e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 151, et seq.) (“the Act”). The Amendment itself Agreement was submitted with the petitionrequest. A statement in support of the instant petition request was also filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx Xxxx X. XxxxXxxxxx, Xx. on behalf Director of SBC IllinoisNegotiations for Ameritech and Xxxxxx Xxxxxx, and by Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx on behalf of XxxxxxGeneral Counsel for Xxxxxxx, stating that the facts contained in the petition are, to the best of their knowledge, information and belief, request for approval are true and correct. At Pursuant to notice as required by law and the early onset rules and regulations of the Commission, this casematter came on for hearing before a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on October 17, 2001. Staff filed the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst in of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division, which was admitted into evidence. In his written statement, Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended the approval of the AmendmentAgreement. The Administrative Law Judge waived At the hearing hearing, Staff indicated that there were no unresolved issues in this matter andproceeding, by ruling, admitted the Verified Statement of A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx into evidence and marked the record was marked “Heard and Taken” on November 30, 2005. See Notice of Ruling (12-1-05).”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 3October 21, 20052003, and pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“SBC Illinois) (hereinafter “IBTC”) and Cordia Cypress Communications Corp. Operating Company, Inc. (“CordiaCypress”), filed with the Illinois Commerce Commission (“Commission”) a joint petition Petition for approval of a 3rd the First Amendment to their interconnection agreement the Interconnection Agreement dated September 25, 2003 (the “Amendment”), that is dated October 24, 2005, and governed by under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Amendment itself was submitted with the petitionPetition. A statement in support of the instant petition Petition was also filed filed, along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. on behalf of SBC IllinoisIBTC, and by Xxxxx Xxxxxxx X. Xxxxxxxxx XxXxxx on behalf of XxxxxxCypress, stating that the facts contained in the petition are, Petition are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information information, and belief, true and correct. At the early onset of this case, Commission Staff (“Staff”) filed the Verified Statement of A. X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst in of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. In his written statement, Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended Pursuant to notice given in accordance with the approval law and the rules and regulations of the Amendment. The Commission, this matter was heard by a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge waived of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 12, 2003. Counsel for IBTC and Staff appeared at the hearing and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this matter and, by ruling, admitted the proceeding. The Verified Statement of A. X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx was admitted into evidence and marked the record was marked “Heard and Taken” on November 30, 2005. See Notice of Ruling (12-1-05).”