Common use of PROCEDURAL HISTORY Clause in Contracts

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20, 2005, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois Bell”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage (“Megacomm”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging Interconnection Agreement dated September 27, 2005, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Megacomm, 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17, 2005. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17, Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20January 27, 20052003, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (SBC Illinois) (“Illinois BellSBC”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage Oneida Network Services, Inc. (“MegacommOneida”), filed a joint petition Petition for approval of a Paging Interconnection negotiated Traffic Termination Agreement dated September 27January 2, 20052003 (the “Agreement”), under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreement was submitted with the petitionPetition. A statement in support of the petition Petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of MegacommSBC Illinois and by ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of ▇▇▇▇▇▇, stating that the facts contained in the petition 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17March 11, 20052003. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17March 11th, Illinois Bell SBC, Oneida, and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20July 13, 20052001, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois BellAmeritech Illinois”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage RCN Telecom Services of Illinois, Inc. (“MegacommRCN”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging the First Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement dated September 27May 18, 20052001 (the “Agreement”), under Section Sections 252(a)(1) and 252 (e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 151, 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 ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇, on behalf of Illinois ▇▇▇▇ Ameritech Illinois, and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ , on behalf of MegacommRCN, 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17August 15, 20052001. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17August 15, Illinois Bell Staff and Staff Ameritech appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20February 1, 20052007, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois Bell”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage Geneseo Telephone Company (“MegacommGeneseo”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging Interconnection the ILEC Operator Services/Directory Assistance Standalone Agreement dated September 27January 9, 20052007, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of MegacommGeneseo, 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17March 22, 20052007. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17, Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20August 16, 20052004, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois BellSBC Illinois”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage nii communications, Ltd. (“Megacommnii”), ) filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging the Second Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement dated September 27July 28, 20052004, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ on behalf of SBC Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Megacommnii, 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17September 21, 20052004. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17September 21, SBC Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20February 7, 20052003, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (SBC Illinois) (hereinafter “Illinois BellSBC”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage Arch Wireless Operating Company, Inc. (“MegacommArch Wireless”), filed a joint petition Petition for approval of a the Paging Wireless Interconnection Agreement dated September 27January 15, 20052003 (the “Agreement”), under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreement was submitted with the petitionPetition. A statement in support of the petition Petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Illinois ▇▇▇▇ SBC, and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of MegacommArch Wireless, stating that the facts contained in the petition Petition are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, information, and belief. Illinois Commerce Commission Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇, of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. Pursuant to notice as required by given in accordance with the law and the rules and regulations of the Commission, this matter came on for hearing was heard by a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17February 26, 20052003. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17, Illinois Bell Counsel for SBC and Staff appeared at the hearing and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. The Verified Statement of ▇▇. ▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20February 13, 20052013, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Illinois d/b/a AT&T Wholesale (“Illinois Bell”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage 365 Wireless, LLC (“Megacomm365”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging the Wireless Interconnection Agreement dated September 27January 31, 20052013, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Illinois ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Megacomm365, 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17March 13, 20052013. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17March 13, Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20September 10, 20052003, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois BellSBC Illinois”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage Ameritech Advanced Data Services of Illinois, Inc. (“MegacommAmeritech”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging the Tenth Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement dated September 27August 21, 20052003, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreement was submitted with the petitionPetition. A statement in support of the petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of SBC Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of MegacommAmeritech, stating that the facts contained in the petition 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17October 21, 20052003. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17October 21, Illinois Bell SBC Illinois, Ameritech, and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20June 29, 20052011, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois Bell”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage Big River Telephone Company, LLC. (“MegacommBig River”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging the Interconnection Agreement dated September 27June 28, 20052011, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇, on behalf of ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Megacomm, Big River 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17September 12, 20052011. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17September 12, Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20June 9, 2005, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois Bell”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Communications, Inc. (“Megacomm▇▇▇▇▇▇”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging the First Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement dated September 27June 1, 2005, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreement Amendment was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Megacomm▇▇▇▇▇▇, 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17July 21, 2005. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17July 21, Illinois Bell ▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇, and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20January 8, 20052009, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois Bell”) and Megacomm Corporation Illinois Bell Telephone Company and Everycall Communications, Inc. d/b/a MegaPage All American Home d/b/a Local USA (“MegacommEverycall”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging the Interconnection Agreement dated September 27December 31, 20052008, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ ▇, ▇▇. on behalf of Illinois ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of MegacommEverycall, 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17February 10, 20052008. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17February 10, Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20May 10, 20052004, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois BellSBC Illinois”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage Intermedia Communications, Inc. (“MegacommIntermedia”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging the Third Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement dated September 27April 20, 20052004, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ on behalf of SBC Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of MegacommIntermedia, 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17June 10, 20052004. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17June 10, Illinois Bell SBC Illinois, Intermedia, and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20August 24, 20052011, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois Bell”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage Sonic Telecom, LLC (“MegacommSonic”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging the Interconnection Agreement dated September 27August 15, 20052011, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇, on behalf of ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ , on behalf of Megacomm, 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 172, 20052011. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 172, Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20December 16, 2005, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois Bell”) and Megacomm Corporation IBFA Acquisition Company d/b/a MegaPage Farm Bureau Connection (“MegacommIBFA”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging Interconnection Agreement 2nd amendment to the interconnection agreement dated September 27November 28, 2005, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of MegacommIBFA, 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November January 17, 20052006. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November January 17, Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20February 25, 20052004, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois BellSBC Illinois”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage OnePoint Communications Illinois, LLC (“MegacommOnePoint”), filed a joint petition Petition for approval of a Paging the Fourth Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement dated September 27February 20, 20052004, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreement was submitted with the petitionPetition. A statement in support of the petition Petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ on behalf of SBC Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of MegacommOnePoint, stating that the facts contained in the petition 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17April 19, 20052004. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17April 19, Illinois Bell SBC Illinois, OnePoint, and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20August 27, 20052003, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois BellSBC Illinois”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage A Beep LLC (“MegacommA Beep”), filed a joint petition Petition for approval of a Paging Interconnection Agreement dated September 27July 24, 20052003, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreement was submitted with the petitionPetition. A statement in support of the petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by J. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ on behalf of SBC Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of MegacommA Beep, 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17October 8, 20052003. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17October 8, SBC Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 2017, 20052012, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois Bell”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage tw telecom of illinois llc (“Megacommtw telecom”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging the Interconnection Agreement dated September 27October 12, 20052012, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of Megacommtw 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 1719, 20052012. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 1719, Illinois Bell ▇▇▇▇, ▇▇ telecom and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20August 26, 20052004, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois BellSBC Illinois”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage Global Crossing Local Services, Inc. (“MegacommGlobal”), ) filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging the Second Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement dated September 27August 23, 20052004, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreement Amendment was submitted with the petition. A statement in support of the petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ on behalf of SBC Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇ on behalf of MegacommGlobal, 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17October 4, 20052004. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17October 4, SBC Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. Mr. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ ’s Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20August 17, 20052009, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois BellAT&T Illinois”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage Aero North Communications Inc. (“MegacommAero North”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging the Interconnection Agreement dated September 27August 10, 2005, 2009 under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 252 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 ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ ▇, ▇▇. on behalf of AT&T Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of MegacommAero 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 a the duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17September 3, 20052009. Staff previously filed the Verified Statement of ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications DivisionDivision on September 3, 2009. At the hearing on November 17hearing, Aero North did not appear. AT&T Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. Subsequently ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20September 9, 20052004, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois BellSBC Illinois”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage OnePoint Communications Illinois, LLC (“MegacommOnePoint”), filed a joint petition for approval of a Paging the Seventh Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement dated September 271, 20052004, under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ on behalf of SBC Illinois ▇▇▇▇ and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of MegacommOnePoint, 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 a duly authorized Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on November 17October 18, 20052004. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17October 18, SBC Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On October 20January 23, 20052001, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Illinois BellAmeritech Illinois”) and Megacomm Corporation d/b/a MegaPage Looking Glass Networks, Inc. (“MegacommLooking Glass”), filed a joint petition request for approval of a Paging the Negotiated Interconnection Agreement dated September 27November 1, 20052000 (the “Agreement”), under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. §§ 151 151, et seq.) (“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 ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ ▇, on behalf of Illinois ▇▇▇▇ Ameritech Illinois, and by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ , on behalf of MegacommLooking Glass, 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 November 17February 28, 20052001. Staff filed the Verified Statement of ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 17, Illinois Bell and Staff appeared and agreed that there were no unresolved issues in this proceedingwhich was admitted into evidence. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ Verified Statement was admitted into evidence recommended the approval of the Agreement. At the hearing, Staff indicated that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding, and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”