ISP-Bound Traffic Rebuttable Presumption Sample Clauses

ISP-Bound Traffic Rebuttable Presumption. 6.3.5.1 In accordance with Paragraph 79 of the FCC’s ISP Compensation Order, the Parties agree that there is a rebuttable presumption that any of the combined Section 251(b)(5) Traffic, Non-toll VoIP-PSTN Traffic, ISP-Bound Traffic and in AT&T-12STATE, Wholesale Local Switching Traffic exchanged between the Parties exceeding a 3:1 terminating to originating ratio is, for purposes of Intercarrier Compensation, presumed to be ISP-Bound Traffic subject to the compensation terms in this Section 6.3.5 above. Either Party has the right to rebut the 3:1 ISP-Bound Traffic presumption by identifying the actual ISP-Bound Traffic by any means agreed by the Parties, or by any method approved by the Commission. If a Party seeking to rebut the presumption takes appropriate action at the Commission pursuant to Section 252 of the Act and the Commission agrees that such Party has rebutted the presumption, the methodology and/or means approved by the Commission for use in determining the ratio shall be utilized by the Parties as of the date of the Commission approval and, in addition, shall be utilized to determine the appropriate true- up as described below. During the pendency of any such proceedings to rebut the presumption, the Parties will remain obligated to pay the reciprocal compensation rates set forth in Section 6.2 above for Section 251(b)(5) Traffic and Non-toll VoIP-PSTN Traffic and the rates set forth in Section 6.3.4.2
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (16)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
ISP-Bound Traffic Rebuttable Presumption. In accordance with Paragraph 79 of the FCC’s ISP Compensation Order, LEC and ILEC agree that there is a rebuttable presumption that any of the combined Section 251(b)(5) Traffic and ISP-Bound Traffic exchanged between LEC and ILEC exceeding a 3:1 terminating to originating ratio is presumed to be ISP-Bound Traffic subject to the compensation and growth cap terms in this Section 2.0. Either party has the right to rebut the 3:1 ISP presumption by filing an action at the appropriate Commission and identifying the actual ISP-Bound Traffic by any means mutually agreed by the Parties, or by any method approved by the Commission. If a Party seeking to rebut the presumption takes appropriate action at the Commission pursuant to section 252 of the Act and the Commission agrees that such Party has rebutted the presumption, the methodology and/or means approved by the Commission for use in determining the ratio shall be utilized by the Parties as of the date of the Commission approval and, in addition, shall be utilized to determine the appropriate true-up as described below. During the pendency of any such proceedings to rebut the presumption, LEC and ILEC will remain obligated to pay the presumptive rates (reciprocal compensation rates for traffic below a 3:1 ratio, the rates set forth in Section 2.2.2 for traffic above the ratio) subject to a true-up upon the conclusion of such proceedings. Such true-up shall be retroactive back to the date a Party first sought appropriate relief from the Commission.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (10)
ISP-Bound Traffic Rebuttable Presumption. 3.9.2.1 In accordance with Paragraph 79 of the FCC’s ISP Compensation Order, the Parties agree that there is a rebuttable presumption that any of the combined Section 251(b)(5) Traffic and ISP-Bound Traffic exchanged between the Parties exceeding a 3:1 terminating to originating ratio is presumed to be ISP-Bound Traffic. Either Party has the right to rebut the 3:1 ISP-Bound Traffic presumption by identifying the actual ISP- Bound Traffic by any means mutually agreed by the Parties, or by any method approved by the Commission. If a Party seeking to rebut the presumption takes appropriate action at the Commission pursuant to Section 252 of the Act and the Commission agrees that such Party has rebutted the presumption, the methodology and/or means approved by the Commission for use in determining the ratio shall be utilized by the Parties as of the date of the Commission approval. During the pendency of any such proceedings to rebut the presumption, the Parties will remain obligated to pay the rates set forth in Section 3.9.1.2 for Section 251(b)(5) Traffic and ISP-Bound Traffic.
Sample 1
ISP-Bound Traffic Rebuttable Presumption. In accordance with Paragraph 79 of the FCC’s ISP Compensation Order, LEC and ILEC agree that there is a rebuttable presumption that any of the combined Section 251(b)(5) Traffic and ISP-Bound Traffic exchanged between LEC and ILEC exceeding a 3:1 terminating to originating ratio is presumed to be ISP-Bound Traffic subject to the compensation and growth cap terms in this Section 2.0. Either party has the right to rebut the 3:1 ISP presumption by identifying the actual ISP-Bound Traffic by any means mutually agreed by the Parties, or by any method approved by the Commission. If a Party seeking to rebut the presumption takes appropriate action at the Commission pursuant to section 252 of the Act and the Commission agrees that such Party has rebutted the presumption, the methodology and/or means approved by the Commission for use in determining the ratio shall be utilized by the Parties as of the date of the Commission approval and, in addition, shall be utilized to determine the appropriate true-up as described below. During the pendency of any such proceedings to rebut the presumption, LEC and ILEC will remain obligated to pay the presumptive rates (reciprocal compensation rates for traffic below a 3:1 ratio, the rates set forth in Section 2.2.2 for traffic above the ratio) subject to a true-up upon the conclusion of such proceedings. Such true-up shall be retroactive back to the date a Party first sought appropriate relief from the Commission. 00002 AMENDMENT – MISSOURI INTERCARRIER COMPENSATION FOR ISP-BOUND TRAFFIC AND FEDERAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT SECTION 251(B)(5) TRAFFIC (ADOPTING FCC’S INTERIM ISP TERMINATING COMPENSATION PLAN)/SOUTHWESTERN XXXX TELEPHONE, L.P. SBC MISSOURI/VOICESTREAM WIRELESS CORPORATION 083004 3.0 Reservation of Rights
Sample 1
ISP-Bound Traffic Rebuttable Presumption. 6.3.5.1 In accordance with Paragraph 79 of the FCC’s ISP Compensation Order, the Parties agree that there is a rebuttable presumption that any of the combined Section 251(b)(5) Traffic, ISP-Bound Traffic and, in AT&T-12STATE, Wholesale Local Switching Traffic exchanged between the Parties exceeding a 3:1 terminating to originating ratio is, for purposes of Intercarrier Compensation, presumed to be ISP-Bound Traffic subject to the compensation terms in this Section 6.3.5 above. Either Party has the right to rebut the 3:1 ISP-Bound Traffic presumption by identifying the actual ISP-Bound Traffic by any means agreed by the Parties, or by any method approved by the Commission. If a Party seeking to rebut the presumption takes appropriate action at the Commission pursuant to Section 252 of the Act and the Commission agrees that such Party has rebutted the presumption, the methodology and/or means approved by the Commission for use in determining the ratio shall be utilized by the Parties as of the date of the
Sample 1
ISP-Bound Traffic Rebuttable Presumption. The Parties agree that there is a rebuttable presumption that all minutes of use exceeding a 3:1 ratio of terminating to originating traffic are ISP-Bound Traffic minutes subject to the compensation and growth cap terms in this section. Either Party has the right to rebut the 3:1 presumption and such right is governed by the terms of the FCC Internet Order. The Parties may rebut the 3:1 presumption by mutual agreement or by any method approved by the Commission.
Sample 1

Related to ISP-Bound Traffic Rebuttable Presumption

  • Endorsement and Collection of Checks, Etc The Custodian is hereby authorized to endorse and collect all checks, drafts or other orders for the payment of money received by the Custodian for the account of a Portfolio.

  • Execution of Agreement; Counterparts; Electronic Signatures (a) This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which, when taken together, shall constitute one and the same instrument, and shall become effective when counterparts have been signed by each of the parties to this Agreement and delivered to the other parties to this Agreement; it being understood that all parties to this Agreement need not sign the same counterparts.

  • Acknowledgement and Consent to Bail-In of EEAAffected Financial Institutions Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any Loan Document or in any other agreement, arrangement or understanding among any such parties, each party hereto acknowledges that any liability of any EEAAffected Financial Institution arising under any Loan Document, to the extent such liability is unsecured, may be subject to the write-down and conversion powers of an EEAthe applicable Resolution Authority and agrees and consents to, and acknowledges and agrees to be bound by:

  • Security Agreement under Uniform Commercial Code (a) It is the intention of the parties hereto that this Mortgage shall constitute a Security Agreement within the meaning of the Uniform Commercial Code (the “Code”) of the State in which the Mortgaged Property is located. If an Event of Default shall occur and be continuing under this Mortgage, then in addition to having any other right or remedy available at law or in equity, Mortgagee shall have the option of either (i) proceeding under the Code and exercising such rights and remedies as may be provided to a secured party by the Code with respect to all or any portion of the Mortgaged Property which is personal property (including, without limitation, taking possession of and selling such property) or (ii) treating such property as real property and proceeding with respect to both the real and personal property constituting the Mortgaged Property in accordance with Mortgagee’s rights, powers and remedies with respect to the real property (in which event the default provisions of the Code shall not apply). If Mortgagee shall elect to proceed under the Code, then ten days’ notice of sale of the personal property shall be deemed reasonable notice and the reasonable expenses of retaking, holding, preparing for sale, selling and the like incurred by Mortgagee shall include, but not be limited to, reasonable attorneys’ fees and legal expenses. At Mortgagee’s request, Mortgagor shall assemble the personal property and make it available to Mortgagee at a place designated by Mortgagee which is reasonably convenient to both parties.

  • Counterparts; Electronic Signatures and Transmission (a) This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original, but all such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same instrument. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page of this Agreement by Electronic Transmission shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Agreement.

  • Acknowledgement and Consent to Bail-In of EEA Financial Institutions Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any Loan Document or in any other agreement, arrangement or understanding among any such parties, each party hereto acknowledges that any liability of any EEA Financial Institution arising under any Loan Document, to the extent such liability is unsecured, may be subject to the write-down and conversion powers of an EEA Resolution Authority and agrees and consents to, and acknowledges and agrees to be bound by:

  • Certain Uniform Commercial Code Terms As used herein, the terms “Account”, “Chattel Paper”, “Commodity Account”, “Commodity Contract”, “Deposit Account”, “Document”, “Electronic Chattel Paper”, “General Intangible”, “Goods”, “Instrument”, “Inventory”, “Equipment”, “Investment Property”, “Letter-of-Credit Right”, “Money”, “Proceeds”, “Promissory Note”, “Supporting Obligations” and “Tangible Chattel Paper” have the respective meanings set forth in Article 9 of the NYUCC, and the terms “Certificated Security”, “Clearing Corporation”, “Entitlement Holder”, “Financial Asset”, “Indorsement”, “Securities Account”, “Securities Intermediary”, “Security”, “Security Entitlement” and “Uncertificated Security” have the respective meanings set forth in Article 8 of the NYUCC.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.