Common use of Preliminary Matters Clause in Contracts

Preliminary Matters. On May 26, 2006, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, XxXxxx Telephone Company (“McNabb”) and Cingular Wireless LLC on behalf of its affiliates New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC and Champaign CelTelCo (collectively “Cingular”) filed with the Illinois Commerce Commission (“Commission”) a verified joint petition seeking Commission approval of an Agreement pursuant to Section 252(a)(1) and 252(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 151, et seq.) (“Telecommunications Act”). The Agreement was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx on behalf of XxXxxx and by Xxxxxxx X. Xxx Xxxxxxx on behalf of Cingular, stating that the facts contained in the petition for approval 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on July 10, 2006. Staff filed the Verified Statement of X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on July 26, XxXxxx and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

Preliminary Matters. On May 26February 21, 20062002, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, XxXxxx Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“McNabb”Ameritech) and Cingular Wireless LLC on behalf Ameritech Advanced Data Service of its affiliates New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC and Champaign CelTelCo Illinois, (collectively “CingularAADS”) filed with the Illinois Commerce Commission (“Commission”) a verified joint petition seeking Commission request for approval of an Agreement the First Amendment to a Negotiated Interconnection Agreement, dated January 31, 2002, between the parties, pursuant to Section 47 U.S.C. Secs. 252(a)(1) and 252(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996, 47 U.S.C. Sec. 151, et seq.) . (“Telecommunications the Act”). The Amendment to the Agreement was submitted with the petitionrequest. A statement in support of the petition request was filed filed, along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxxx X. Xxxxxxx, on behalf of XxXxxx Ameritech, and by Xxxxxxx X. Xxx Xxxxxxx Xxxxx Xxx, on behalf of CingularAADS, stating that the facts contained in the petition request for approval are were true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information, and beliefcorrect. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, this matter came on for hearing by a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on July 10March 4, 20062002. Staff filed the Verified Statement of X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx of Xxx Xxx, a Policy Analyst with the Commission’s Telecommunications Division, which was admitted into evidence. Xx. Xxx recommended approval of the Agreement. At the hearing on July 26hearing, XxXxxx Staff and Staff appeared and agreed Ameritech indicated that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement was admitted into evidence , and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

Preliminary Matters. On May 26January 14, 20062003, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, XxXxxx Illinois Bell Telephone Company Company, (“McNabbAmeritech”) and Cingular Wireless LLC on behalf of its affiliates New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC and Champaign CelTelCo TDS Metrocom, (collectively “CingularTDS”) filed with the Illinois Commerce Commission (“Commission”) a verified joint petition seeking Commission request for approval of an Agreement the Second Amendment to their Negotiated Interconnection Agreement, dated December 10, 2002, pursuant to Section 47 U.S.C. Secs. 252(a)(1) and 252(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996, 47 U.S.C. Sec. 151, et seq.) . (“Telecommunications the Act”). The Second Amendment to the Agreement was submitted with the petitionrequest. A statement in support of the petition request was filed filed, along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx X. Xxxxx, on behalf of XxXxxx TDS, and by Xxxxxxx X. Xxx Xxxxxxx Xxxx Xxxxxx, on behalf of CingularAmeritech, stating that the facts contained in the petition request for approval are were true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information, and beliefcorrect. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, this matter came on for hearing by a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on July 10January 30, 20062003. Staff filed the Verified Statement of X. A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx of Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst with the Commission’s Telecommunications Division, which was admitted into evidence. Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended approval of the Second Amendment to the Agreement. At the hearing on July 26hearing, XxXxxx Staff, Ameritech and Staff appeared and agreed TDS indicated that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement was admitted into evidence , and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

Preliminary Matters. On May 26December 20, 20062001, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, XxXxxx American Cellular Corporation, (“American”) Xxxxxx Communications Corporation (“Xxxxxx”) and Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“McNabb”) and Cingular Wireless LLC on behalf of its affiliates New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC and Champaign CelTelCo (collectively “CingularAmeritech”) filed with the Illinois Commerce Commission (“Commission”) a verified joint petition seeking Commission request for approval of an Agreement a Negotiated Interconnection Agreement, dated February 16, 2001, between the parties, pursuant to Section 47 U.S.C Secs. 252(a)(1) and 252(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996, 47 U.S.C. 151, et seq.) . (“Telecommunications the Act”). The Agreement was submitted with the petitionrequest. A statement in support of the petition request was filed filed, along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxxx Xxxxx, on behalf of XxXxxx American and by Xxxxxxx X. Xxx Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx, and Xxxx Xxxxxx, on behalf of CingularAmeritech, stating that the facts contained in the petition request for approval are were true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information, and beliefcorrect. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, this matter came on for hearing by a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on July January 10, 20062002. Staff filed the Verified Statement of X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx of Xxx Xxx, Ph. D., a Policy Analyst with the Commission’s Telecommunications Division, which was admitted into evidence. Xx. Xxx recommended approval of the Agreement. At the hearing on July 26hearing, XxXxxx Staff and Staff appeared and agreed Ameritech indicated that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement was admitted into evidence , and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

Preliminary Matters. On May 26June 21, 20062000, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, XxXxxx Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“McNabbAmeritech Illinois”) and Cingular Wireless LLC on behalf of its affiliates New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC and Champaign CelTelCo (collectively “Cingular”) filed with the Illinois Commerce Commission Edge Network, Inc. (“CommissionNew Edge”) ), filed a verified joint petition seeking Commission request for approval of an the Negotiated Interconnection Agreement pursuant to Section dated March 15, 2000 (the “Agreement”), under Sections 252(a)(1) and 252(e(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 151, et seq.) (“Telecommunications the Act”). The Agreement was submitted with the petitionrequest. A statement in support of the petition was request were filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxxx X. Xxxxxx, on behalf of XxXxxx Ameritech Illinois and by Xxxxxxx X. Xxx Xxxxxxx Xxxxx XxXxxxx, on behalf of CingularNew Edge, stating that the facts contained in the petition request for approval are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information, and beliefcorrect. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, this matter came on for hearing by a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge Hearing Examiner of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on July 1020, 20062000. Staff filed the Verified Statement of X. A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications DivisionDivision which was admitted into evidence. Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended the approval of the Agreement. At the hearing on July 26hearing, XxXxxx and Staff appeared and agreed indicated that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement was admitted into evidence , and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

Preliminary Matters. On May 26November 21, 20062000, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, XxXxxx Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“McNabbAmeritech Illinois”) and Cingular Wireless LLC on behalf of its affiliates New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC and Champaign CelTelCo Maxcess, Inc., (collectively “CingularMaxcess”) filed with a joint request for approval of the Illinois Commerce Commission first Amendment to an Interconnection Agreement (the “CommissionFirst Amendment”) a verified joint petition seeking Commission approval of an Agreement pursuant to Section dated October 23, 2000 between the parties under Sections 252(a)(1) and 252(e(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996, 47 U.S.C. 151, et seq.) . (“Telecommunications the Act”). The Agreement First Amendment was submitted with the petitionrequest. A statement in support of the petition request was filed filed, along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx, on behalf of XxXxxx Ameritech Illinois, and by Xxxxxxx X. Xxx Xxxxxxx Xxxx, on behalf of CingularMaxcess, stating that the facts contained in the petition request for approval are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information, and beliefcorrect. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, this matter came on for hearing by a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge Hearing Examiner of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on July 10December 7, 20062000. Staff filed the Verified Statement of Xxxxxxxxxxx X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx of Xxxxxx, a Policy Analyst with the Commission’s Telecommunications Division, which was admitted into evidence. Xx. Xxxxxx recommended approval of the First Amendment. At the hearing on July 26hearing, XxXxxx Staff and Staff appeared and agreed Ameritech Illinois indicated that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement was admitted into evidence , and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

Preliminary Matters. On May 26March 7, 20062002, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, XxXxxx Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“McNabbAmeritech Illinois”) and Cingular Wireless LLC on behalf of its affiliates New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC and Champaign CelTelCo (collectively “Cingular”) filed with the Illinois Commerce Commission Cellular Properties, Inc., d/b/a as Cellular One (“CommissionCellular One”) ), filed a verified joint petition seeking Commission request for approval of an Wireless Interconnection Agreement pursuant to Section dated January 11, 2002 (the “Agreement”), under Sections 252(a)(1) and 252(e(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996, 47 U.S.C. 151, et seq.) . (“Telecommunications the Act”). The Agreement was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the petition was request were filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxx Xxxxxx, on behalf of XxXxxx and by Xxxxxxx X. Xxx Xxxxxxx Ameritech Illinois, and, Xxxx Xxxxxx on behalf of CingularCellular One, stating that the facts contained in the petition request for approval are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information, and beliefcorrect. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, this matter came on for hearing by a duly authorized Administrative Adminstrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on July 10March 14, 20062002. Staff filed the Verified Statement of X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx Xxx Xxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications DivisionDivision which was admitted into evidence. Xx. Xxx recommended the approval of the Agreement. At the hearing on July 26hearing, XxXxxx Staff and Staff appeared and agreed Ameritech Illinois indicated that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement was admitted into evidence , and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

Preliminary Matters. On May 26August 15, 20062001, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, XxXxxx Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“McNabbAmeritech Illinois”) and Cingular Wireless LLC on behalf of its affiliates New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC and Champaign CelTelCo Chicago 20 MHZ, LLC, (collectively “CingularChicago 20”) filed with the Illinois Commerce Commission (“Commission”) a verified joint petition seeking Commission request for approval of an Agreement pursuant Amendment to Section a Negotiated Interconnection Agreement, dated May 26, 2001, between the parties, under Sections 252(a)(1) and 252(e(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996, 47 U.S.C. 151, et seq.) . (“Telecommunications the Act”). The Amendment to the Agreement was submitted with the petitionrequest. A statement in support of the petition request was filed filed, along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxx Xxxxxx, on behalf of XxXxxx Ameritech Illinois, and by Xxxxxxx X. Xxx Xxxxxxx Xxxx, on behalf of CingularChicago 20, stating that the facts contained in the petition request for approval are were true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information, and beliefcorrect. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, this matter came on for hearing by a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on July 10September 6, 20062001. Ameritech and Chicago 20 were represented by counsel. Staff filed the Verified Statement of X. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx of Xxxxxxx, a Policy Analyst with the Commission’s Telecommunications Division, which was admitted into evidence. Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended approval of the Agreement. At the hearing on July 26hearing, XxXxxx Staff, Ameritech Illinois and Staff appeared and agreed Chicago 20 indicated that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement was admitted into evidence , and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

Preliminary Matters. On May 26June 21, 20062000, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, XxXxxx Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“McNabbAmeritech Illinois”) and Cingular Wireless LLC on behalf BullsEye Telecom (“BullsEye"), filed a joint request for approval of its affiliates New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC and Champaign CelTelCo the Negotiated Interconnection Agreement dated April 20, 2000, (collectively the “CingularAgreement”) filed with the Illinois Commerce Commission (“Commission”) a verified joint petition seeking Commission approval of an Agreement pursuant to Section under Sections 252(a)(1) and 252(e(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 151, et seq.) (“Telecommunications the Act”). The Agreement was submitted with the petitionrequest. A statement in support of the petition request was filed along with verifications sworn to by Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxxx X. Xxxxxx, on behalf of XxXxxx Ameritech Illinois and by Xxxxxxx X. Xxx Xxxxxxx XxXxxxxx, on behalf of CingularBullsEye Telecom, stating that the facts contained in the petition request for approval are true and correct to correct. Xxxxxx is the best of their knowledgeProject Manager, informationContract Negotiations support, for Southwestern Bell Telephone Company/Illinois Bell Telephone Company, Negotiations and beliefInterconnection. Pursuant to notice as required by law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, this matter came on for hearing by a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge Hearing Examiner of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on July 1018, 20062000. Staff filed the Verified Statement of X. A. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx of the Commission’s Telecommunications DivisionDivision which was admitted into evidence. Xx. Xxxxxxx recommended the approval of the Agreement. At the hearing on July 26hearing, XxXxxx and Staff appeared and agreed indicated that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Xx. Xxxxxxx’x Verified Statement was admitted into evidence , and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”