Common use of PROCEDURAL HISTORY Clause in Contracts

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On August 17, 2009, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“AT&T Illinois”) and Aero North Communications Inc. (“Aero North”), filed a joint petition for approval of the Interconnection Agreement dated August 10, 2009 under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. § 252 et seq.) (“the Act”). A statement in support of the petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. on behalf of AT&T Illinois and by Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxx on behalf of Aero North, stating that the facts contained in the petition are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information, and belief. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, this matter came on for hearing by the duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on September 3, 2009. Staff previously filed the Verified Statement of X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division on September 3, 2009. At the hearing, Aero North did not appear. AT&T Illinois and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Subsequently Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On August October 17, 20092012, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“AT&T IllinoisIllinois Bell”) and Aero North Communications Inc. tw telecom of illinois llc (“Aero Northtw telecom”), filed a joint petition for approval of the Interconnection Agreement dated August 10October 12, 2009 2012, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. § 252 §151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreement was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx on behalf of AT&T Illinois Xxxx and by Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxx on behalf of Aero Northtw telecom, stating that the facts contained in the petition are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information, and belief. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, this matter came on for hearing by the a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on September 3November 19, 20092012. Staff previously filed the Verified Statement of X. A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division on September 3, 2009Division. At the hearinghearing on November 19, Aero North did not appear. AT&T Illinois Xxxx, xx telecom and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Subsequently Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On August 1724, 20092011, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“AT&T IllinoisIllinois Bell”) and Aero North Communications Inc. Sonic Telecom, LLC (“Aero NorthSonic”), filed a joint petition for approval of the Interconnection Agreement dated August 1015, 2009 2011, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 252 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreement was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. XxxxXxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, Xx. on behalf of AT&T Illinois Xxxxxxxx Xxxx and by Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxx Xxxx Xxxxxx, on behalf of Aero North, Sonic stating that the facts contained in the petition are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information, and belief. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, this matter came on for hearing by the a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on September 3November 2, 20092011. Staff previously filed the Verified Statement of X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division on September 3, 2009Division. At the hearinghearing on November 2, Aero North did not appear. AT&T Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Subsequently Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On August 17October 20, 20092005, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“AT&T IllinoisIllinois Bell”) and Aero North Communications Inc. Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage (“Aero NorthMegacomm”), filed a joint petition for approval of the a Paging Interconnection Agreement dated August 10September 27, 2009 2005, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 252 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreement was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxx X. Xxxx, Xx. Xxxx on behalf of AT&T Illinois Xxxx and by Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxxx on behalf of Aero NorthMegacomm, stating that the facts contained in the petition are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information, and belief. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, this matter came on for hearing by the a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on September 3November 17, 20092005. Staff previously filed the Verified Statement of X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division on September 3, 2009Division. At the hearinghearing on November 17, Aero North did not appear. AT&T Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Subsequently Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”