Common use of PROCEDURAL HISTORY Clause in Contracts

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November 22, 2000, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Ameritech Illinois”) and Vectris Telecom, Inc. (“Vectris”), filed joint requests for approval of the First Amendment to Interconnection Agreement dated September 27, 2000 and the Second Amendment to Interconnection Agreement dated October 11, 2000 (the “Agreements”), under §§ 252 (a)(1) 252(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 151, et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreements were submitted with the requests. A statement in support of each request was filed along with verifications sworn to by ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, on behalf of Ameritech Illinois, and ▇. ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, on behalf of Vectris, stating that the facts contained in the request for approval are true and correct. 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 Hearing Examiner of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on January 11, 2001. Staff filed the Verified Statements of ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, in Dockets 00-0753 and 00-0754 respectively, of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division, which were admitted into evidence. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ recommended the approval of the Agreements. At the hearing, Staff indicated that there were no unresolved issues in this proceeding, and the record was marked “Heard and Taken.”

PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On November October 22, 20002012, 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 (“Ameritech Illinois”) and Vectris Telecom, Inc. (“VectrisICTC”), filed a joint requests petition for approval of the Negotiated First Amendment to an Interconnection Agreement dated September 27, 2000 and the Second Amendment to Interconnection Agreement dated October 11, 2000 (the “Agreements”), under §§ Section 252 (a)(1) 252(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 151, §§151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreements were Amendment was submitted with the requestspetition. A statement in support of each request the joint petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇ on behalf of Ameritech Illinois, ICTC and ▇. ▇. by ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇, ▇▇ on behalf of VectrisUSCOC, stating that the facts contained in the request for approval petition are true and correctcorrect 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 Hearing Examiner Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on January 11November 15, 20012012. Staff filed the Verified Statements Statement of ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, in Dockets 00-0753 and 00-0754 respectively, ▇ of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division. At the hearing on November 15, which ICTC and Staff appeared and agreed that there were admitted into evidenceno unresolved issues in this proceeding. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ and ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ recommended the approval of the Agreements. At the hearing, Staff indicated 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 November 221, 20002002, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Ameritech Illinois”) and Vectris Telecom, Inc. Focal Communications Corporation of Illinois (“VectrisFocal”), filed a joint requests petition for approval of the First Third Amendment to Interconnection Agreement dated September 27, 2000 and the Second Amendment to Interconnection Agreement dated October 1117, 2000 2002 (the “AgreementsAmendment”), under §§ Section 252 (a)(1) 252(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 151, §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreements were Amendment was submitted with the requestsPetition. A statement in support of each request the Petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, on behalf of Ameritech Illinois, and ▇. ▇. by ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇, on behalf of Vectris▇▇▇▇▇, stating that the facts contained in the request for approval petition are true and correctcorrect 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 Hearing Examiner Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on January 11December 4, 20012002. Staff filed the Verified Statements Statement of ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, in Dockets 00-0753 and 00-0754 respectively, of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division, which were admitted into evidence. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ recommended the approval of the Agreements. At the hearinghearing on December 4, Ameritech, Focal, and Staff indicated 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 November 22April 25, 20002003, pursuant to 83 Illinois Administrative Code Part 763, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (“Ameritech SBC Illinois”) and Vectris TelecomAccuTel of Texas, Inc. d/b/a 1-800-4-A- PHONE (“VectrisAccuTel”), filed joint requests a Joint Petition for approval of the First Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement dated September 27, 2000 and the Second Amendment to Interconnection Agreement dated October April 11, 2000 2003 (the “AgreementsAmendment”), under §§ Section 252 (a)(1) 252(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 151, §§ 151 et seq.) (“the Act”). The Agreements were Amendment was submitted with the requestsPetition. A statement in support of each request the Petition was filed along with verifications sworn to by ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇ on behalf of SBC Illinois and by ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇ on behalf of Ameritech Illinois, and ▇. ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, on behalf of VectrisAccuTel, stating that the facts contained in the request for approval Petition are true and correctcorrect 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 Hearing Examiner Administrative Law Judge of the Commission at its offices in Chicago, Illinois, on January 11June 3, 20012003. Staff filed the Verified Statements Statement of ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, in Dockets 00-0753 and 00-0754 respectively, of the Commission’s Telecommunications Division, which were admitted into evidence. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ recommended the approval of the Agreements. At the hearinghearing on June 3, SBC and Staff indicated 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.”