FCC Web Documents citing 1.935

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 07 01

• http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-132A1.doc http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-132A1.pdf
  • notice, may specify a limited period before the filing of short-form applications (FCC Form 175) during which applicants may enter into a settlement to resolve their mutual exclusivity. We stress that any applications that are mutually exclusive under the performance requirements we adopt in this Second Report and Order, as well as certain other pleadings, will be subject to Section 1.935 of the rules. Under that rule, parties that have filed applications that are mutually exclusive with one or more other applications must request Commission approval to dismiss or withdraw the applications. Parties are required to submit any written agreement related to the dismissal or withdrawal as well as affidavits certifying that no money or other consideration in excess of certain
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-115A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-115A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-115A1.txt
  • 47 C.F.R. � 22.29 (1988). We decline to apply the rule against ``greenmail,'' 47 C.F.R. � 22.129, which was intended to deter speculative filings, as there is nothing in the history of this proceeding to indicate that the application for initial cellular service authorization was filed as part of a speculative venture. Section 22.129 was renumbered as current rule section 1.935 in the Commission's adoption of the Universal Licensing System rules. See In the Matter of Biennial Regulatory Review - Amendment of Parts 0, 1, 13, 22, 24, 26, 27, 80, 87, 90, 95, 97, and 101 of the Commission's Rules To Facilitate the Development and Use of the Universal Licensing System in the Wireless Telecommunications Services, Report and Order, 13
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1532A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1532A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1532A1.txt
  • Order, 88 FCC 2d 1492 (1982) (settlements in comparative renewal proceedings would be considered on a case-by-case basis)). DCT Petition for Reconsideration at 8. Id. at 9. Settlement Agreement Among 38.6-40.0 GHz Applicants at 1 (emphasis added). Id. at 2 (emphasis added). DCT Petition for Reconsideration at 14. Id. The current rule that governs agreements to amend application is Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules. 47 C.F.R. � 1.935 (1999). 47 C.F.R. � 21.29(b)(1) (1994). 47 C.F.R. � 21.29(e) (1994). DCT Petition for Reconsideration at 10. See Report and Order and Second NPRM, 12 FCC Rcd at 18641-45 �� 88-97; July 29 MO&O, 14 FCC Rcd at 12449 �� 35-36. DCT Petition for Reconsideration at 10. See July 29 MO&O, 14
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1685A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1685A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1685A1.txt
  • After consummation of the contemplated transactions, the parties intend that Rinker will be licensed to operate the 152.03 Facility, SMFI will be licensed to operate the 152.18 Facility, and Verizon Wireless will be licensed for the remaining facilities currently licensed to Station KCC485. Having reviewed the Settlement and the Withdrawal Request, we find that the parties' requests comply with section 1.935 of the Commission's rules. Therefore, pursuant to sections 4(i) and 310(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i), 310(d), and section 0.331 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 0.331, the Bureau approves (1) application File No. 0000135296, requesting consent to partial assignment of Call Sign KCC485, currently controlled by Verizon Wireless Messaging Services, LLC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-199A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-199A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-199A1.txt
  • their applications for review and petition for reconsideration. The Division hereby cancels the 5 SMR licenses listed below and awards finder's preferences to the respective finders in each case listed. The Division has further reviewed the proposed settlements and hereby approves the withdrawal of the applications for review and the petition for reconsideration in accordance with sections 0.331, 1.106, 1.115, 1.935, and 90.173(k)(1994) of the Commission's rules1 and the Bureau's Public Notice waiving limitations on settlement agreements among parties in contested licensing cases.2 Petitioner Target Licensee Case No. / Call Sign Action Leflore Com Inc. Doris Shaw 96F120 / WPFA415 Application For Review Withdrawn Leflore Com Inc. Barbara Taylor 96F121 / WPEP579 Application For Review Withdrawn Comm Assoc. Samuel Z. Silver
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2026A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2026A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2026A1.txt
  • around Florida. By letter dated August 23, 2000, Priority requested the withdrawal of its Application for Review, noting that ``its business plans have changed as a result of the FCC's transition from site-by-site to geographic licensing of 931 MHz paging facilities, which have rendered [Priority's] concerns moot.'' As part of its request, Priority provided a certification in accordance with section 1.935(a) of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. �1.935(a). The Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed and hereby approves Priority's request to withdraw its Application for Review filed September 27, 1999. Action by the Chief, Policy and Rules Branch, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. For further information, contact Evan C. Baranoff at (202) 418-7142, Wireless Telecommunications
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2027A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2027A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2027A1.txt
  • each dated August 23, 2000, Priority requested the withdrawal of each of its three Petitions for Reconsideration, noting that ``its business plans have changed as a result of the FCC's transition from site-by-site to geographic licensing of 931 MHz paging facilities, which have rendered [Priority's] concerns moot.'' As part of each request, Priority provided a certification in accordance with section 1.935(a) of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. �1.935(a). The Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed and hereby approves Priority's requests to withdraw its three Petitions for Reconsideration. Action by the Chief, Policy and Rules Branch, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. For further information, contact Evan C. Baranoff at (202) 418-7142, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Commercial Wireless
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2126A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2126A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2126A1.txt
  • Mobile Relays and Performance Mobile have now settled Finder's Preference Case No. 95F749 and request cancellation of Performance Mobile's license for Station WPCR378 and the award of a finder's preference for this station to Mobile Relays. The parties also seek approval of Mobile Relay's request to withdraw its Application for Review. The parties have filed certifications in accordance with Section 1.935(a)(1) of the Commission's rules. The Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed the proposed settlement and hereby approves the settlement in accordance with sections 0.331, 1.115, and 1.935 of the Commission's rules. Accordingly, we cancel Performance Mobile's license for Station WPCR378 and grant the license for that station to Mobile Relays pursuant to a finder's preference.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2447A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2447A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2447A1.txt
  • No. 22406-CD-P/ML-95. By letter dated October 23, 2000, Priority requested the withdrawal of its Application for Review, noting that ``its business plans have changed as a result of the FCC's transition from site-by-site to geographic licensing of 931 MHz paging facilities, which have rendered [Priority's] concerns moot.'' As part of its request, Priority provided a certification in accordance with section 1.935(a) of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. �1.935(a). The Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed and hereby approves Priority's request to withdraw its Application for Review filed September 27, 1999. Action by the Deputy Chief, Policy and Rules Branch, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. For further information, contact Evan C. Baranoff at (202) 418-7142, Wireless
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-344A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-344A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-344A1.txt
  • of extracting a settlement payment from Zephyr. See In Re Applications of Algreg Cellular Engineering, Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 99-281 (rel. October 18, 1999). See, ``Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Extends Waiver of Limitations on Payments in Settlement Agreements Among Parties in Contested Licensing Cases,'' Public Notice, DA 99-1734 (rel. August 30, 1999). Section 22.129 was renumbered as current rule section 1.935 in the Commission's adoption of the Universal Licensing System rules. See In the Matter of Biennial Regulatory Review - Amendment of Parts 0, 1, 13, 22, 24, 26, 27, 80, 87, 90, 95, 97, and 101 of the Commission's Rules To Facilitate the Development and Use of the Universal Licensing System in the Wireless Telecommunications Services, Report and Order, 13
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-828A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-828A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-828A1.txt
  • 154(i), and sections 0.331 and 1.939(g) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331, 1.939(g), the petition to deny filed by PA4 on July 15, 1999 IS DISMISSED as MOOT. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Paul D'Ari Chief, Policy and Rules Branch Commercial Wireless Division Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Public Notice, DA 99-745 (Apr. 16, 1999) (Greenmail Waiver Notice). See 47 C.F.R. �� 1.935(a), (b). The waiver initially was in effect for a 90-day period that expired on August 16, 1999, but the Commission subsequently extended it until October 30, 1999. See Public Notice, DA 99-1734 (Aug. 30, 1999). Greenmail Waiver Notice at 1. Letter from David C. Jatlow, Counsel for Binghamton (Jatlow), to Steven Weingarten, Chief, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (CWD
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1922A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1922A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1922A1.txt
  • Petition to Deny (``Petition'') the Application of SMR Spectrum PR, Inc. (``SMR Spectrum'') for assignment of SMR Call Signs WPDF784, WPDF785 and WPDF786 to Nextel License Holdings 5, Inc. (``Nextel''), ULS File No. 0000263863. By letter dated July 23, 2001, Huffman requested the withdrawal of his Petition. As part of his request, Huffman provided a certification in accordance with section 1.935(a), 47 C.F.R. � 1.935(a), of the Commission's rules. The Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed and hereby approves Huffman's request to withdraw his Petition. Pursuant to sections 4(i) and 310(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 310(d), and section 0.331 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 0.331, the Wireless
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2082A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2082A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2082A1.txt
  • incidental to a settlement with Chadmoore to resolve civil litigation between them. Peacock and Chadmoore have filed a copy of the settlement agreement and certifications along with the withdrawal request. The Division has reviewed the proposed settlement and certifications. The Division hereby approves the withdrawal of the petition for reconsideration and finder's preference request in accordance with sections 0.331, 1.106, 1.935, and 90.173(k)(1994) of the Commission's rules.1 Action by Deputy Chief, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. For further information, contact Don Johnson of the Policy and Rules Branch, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau at (202) 418-7240. 1 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331,1.106, 1.115, 1.935, and 90.173(k)(1994). PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 445 12th St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 News media
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2084A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2084A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2084A1.txt
  • the Agreement and their respective certifications along with the withdrawal request. The Division has reviewed the proposed Agreement and certifications. The Division hereby approves the withdrawal of the petition to deny and grants consent to Application File No. 0000230759, which authorizes the assignment of the license for SMR Station WPEF823 from Clarus to All Points, in accordance with sections 0.331, 1.935, 1.939, and 1.948 of the Commission's rules.1 Action by Deputy Chief, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. For further information, contact Don Johnson of the Policy and Rules Branch, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau at (202) 418-7240. 1 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331, 1.935, 1.939 and 1.948. PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 445 12th St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 News
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2240A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2240A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2240A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > DA 01-2240 September 27, 2001 WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUREAU APPROVES SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN BACHOW/COASTEL, L.L.C. AND ALLTEL ILLINOIS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Pursuant to section 4(i) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C.� 154(i), and sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331 and 1.935, the Commercial Wireless Division (Division), Wireless Telecommunications Bureau hereby approves the Joint Motion for Dismissal and Approval of Settlement Agreement (Settlement Agreement) filed by Bachow/Coastel, L.L.C. (Coastel) and ALLTEL Illinois Limited Partnership (ALLTEL) on August 22, 2001. Coastel is the Block B cellular licensee in the Gulf of Mexico Service
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2493A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2493A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2493A1.txt
  • Bureau's Order, In re Application of AWI Spectrum Co., For Consent to Assignment of Specialized Mobile Radio Licenses, DA 01-1268, 16 FCC Rcd. 10945 (WTB rel. May 25, 2001). On September 4, 2001, Southern filed a Petition to Withdraw its Petition for Reconsideration (Request). On October 23, 2001, Southern filed an Affidavit in support of its Request pursuant to Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's Rules. The Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed and hereby approves Southern's Petition to Withdraw its Petition for Reconsideration. In view of Southern's withdrawal of its Petition for Reconsideration, the Joint Opposition of Arch Wireless, Inc. and Nextel Communications, Inc. filed on July 10, 2001 in this proceeding is hereby deemed moot
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2554A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2554A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2554A1.txt
  • Advanced Radio Telecom Corporation Steubenville, OH 0000350828 WPJC415 Advanced Radio Telecom Corporation Pueblo, CO 0000350996 WMT779 Advanced Radio Telecom Corporation Tucson, AZ 0000351029 WPJC417 Advanced Radio Telecom Corporation Wheeling, WV 0000351216 WPJE253 Advanced Radio Telecom Corporation Colorado Springs, CO On May 15, 2001, TRW filed a Motion to Withdraw its Petition to Deny. On October 22, 2001, pursuant to Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules, TRW filed a declaration that neither TRW or its principals received or will receive any money or other consideration in exchange for the withdrawal of the Petition to Deny. By this Public Notice, we accept the withdrawal of TRW's Petition to Deny and dismiss the Petition to Deny pursuant to Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2690A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2690A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2690A1.txt
  • a Settlement Agreement, dated September 26, 2001, between Hargray and Carolina PCS I Limited Partnership. On October 9, 2001, Hargray filed Amendment No. 1 to the Settlement Agreement. On October 12, 2001, Hargray filed a corrected version of Amendment No. 1 to the Settlement Agreement. Pursuant to Section 4(i) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C.� 154(i), and Sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331 and 1.935, the Bureau has reviewed and hereby approves Hargray's Request to Withdraw its Petition to Deny and the Settlement Agreement (as amended). Pursuant to Section 310(d) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. � 310(d), and Section 0.331 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 0.331, the Bureau hereby approves, subject to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-326A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-326A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-326A1.txt
  • case, the Parties have requested that the finder's preference award be set aside. The Division also hereby approves the withdrawal of the petition for reconsideration, sets aside the finder's preference award, and sets aside the notice of cancellation for Call Sign WNLS526 without judging the merits or establishing any judicial precedent. It does so in accordance with sections 0.331, 1.106, 1.935, and 90.173(k)(1994) of the Commission's rules and Public Notice, DA 99-745. Action by Deputy Chief, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. For further information, contact Don Johnson of the Policy and Rules Branch, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau at (202) 418-7240. Power Spectrum was a subsidiary of Geotek Communications, Inc. (Geotek), a former 900 MHz licensee, which has assigned
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-327A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-327A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-327A1.txt
  • Action by Deputy Chief, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. For further information, contact Don Johnson of the Policy and Rules Branch, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau at (202) 418-7240. Power Spectrum was a subsidiary of Geotek Communications, Inc. (Geotek), a former 900 MHz licensee that has assigned its licenses and discontinued operations. 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331, 1.106, 1.115, 1.935, and 90.173(k)(1994). PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 445 12th St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 News Media Information 202 / 418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202 / 418-2830 TTY 202 / 418-2555 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov +D�� +D`� +D`� �����PNG > �!�R>^��S�S߿�"K�k������er4 �J�dM�O�O � �,I TV��5 0�z̪�� ��� %�o� �� � �a�% Tf(c) U~��Uy�Ӛ�o=�c� {�YAD ���Zv�}�YAD e/�,�-�%E9 ^1�J 2�� bʆPh=f 8H�]}��`��2@ ���'����X�t�p�O � ��$��>��� -�m�``�Q(q
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-126A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-126A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-126A1.txt
  • Opposition to the Petition for Stay on July 2, 2001 (Nextel Stay Opposition). On September 13, 2001, Nationwide filed separate requests to withdraw its Petition for Reconsideration and Petition for Stay. On January 10, 2002, Nationwide filed supplements to each of its withdrawal requests. Pursuant to Section 4(i) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. � 154(i), and Sections 0.331 and 1.935(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331 and 1.935(a), the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau has reviewed and hereby approves Nationwide's requests to withdraw its Petition for Reconsideration and Petition for Stay, as supplemented on January 10, 2002. In light of our approval of Nationwide's requests to withdraw its Petition for Reconsideration and Petition for Stay, we dismiss the J&K Opposition,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-128A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-128A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-128A1.txt
  • of the above-listed application. On December 28, 2001, Gila River Cellular General Partnership (Gila) filed an Opposition to the Petition to Deny (Opposition). On January 4, 2002, CWI filed a request to Withdraw its Petition to Deny (Withdrawal Request). On January 10, 2002, CWI filed a Supplement to its Withdrawal Request in which it provided the certification required by Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 1.935(a). Pursuant to Section 4(i) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act), 47 U.S.C. � 154(i), and Sections 0.331 and 1.935(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331 and 1.935(a), the Bureau has reviewed and hereby approves CWI's Withdrawal Request as supplemented on January 10, 2002. In light of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1313A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1313A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1313A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 0 0 0 0 0 0 � DA 02-1313 June 5, 2002 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN ACS WIRELESS SUB, INC. AND COPPER VALLEY WIRELESS, INC. APPROVED Pursuant to section 4(i) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C.� 154(i), and sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331 and 1.935, the Policy and Rules Branch (Branch) of the Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, has approved the Joint Motion for Dismissal and Approval of Settlement Agreement (Settlement Agreement) filed by ACS Wireless Sub, Inc. (ACS Wireless) and Copper Valley Wireless, Inc. (Copper Valley). ACS Wireless filed a Phase II unserved
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1485A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1485A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1485A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit b DA 02-1485 June 25, 2002 WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUREAU APPROVES WITHDRAWAL OF PLEADINGS AND RELATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Pursuant to sections 0.331 and 1.935(a) and (b) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331 and 1.935(a) and (b), the Commercial Wireless Division (Division) hereby approves the Request for Approval of Withdrawal of Pleadings and the related Settlement Agreement filed by Link Two Communications, Inc. (Link Two) and Harry Brix (Brix) on April 18, 2002. Brix operates paging Stations KNKI691, KNKG857 and KNKO310, frequency 931.5625
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1524A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1524A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1524A1.txt
  • spectrum. Therefore, Cal Water's request to operate on 932/941.28125 MHz in the areas of Stockton, San Carlos, and Dillon Beach, California must be dismissed pursuant to Section 1.934(e)(1) of the Commission's Rules. B. San Francisco Applications and Settlement Agreement Cal Water and San Francisco seek approval of their Settlement Agreement in order to obtain grants of their MAS applications. Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules permits parties that have filed applications that are mutually exclusive with one or more applications to enter into an agreement to resolve the mutual exclusivity. Additionally, parties that have filed an informal objection against an application and then seek to withdraw or request dismissal of the objection must obtain the approval of the Commission. In its
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3573A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3573A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3573A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit � � � � � � � DA 02-3573 December 23, 2002 WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUREAU APPROVES SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WWC LICENSE L.L.C. AND WWC HOLDING CO., INC. AND N.E. COLORADO CELLULAR INC. Pursuant to section 4(i) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. � 154(i), and sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 0.331 and 1.935, the Policy and Rules Branch (``Branch'') of the Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau hereby approves the Joint Motion for Dismissal and Approval of Settlement (``Settlement Agreement'') filed by WWC License L.L.C. and WWC Holding Co, Inc., both wholly-owned subsidiaries of Western Wireless Corporation (collectively referred to as ``Western'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-369A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-369A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-369A1.txt
  • Reconsider the Bureau's approval of the Request to Withdraw Application of 360� Communications Company of Pennsylvania No. 1 to assign licenses to Venus, ULS File No. 0000174992 (collectively referred to as ``Petitions''). On March 28, 2001, Venus filed a Petition to Withdraw the Petitions. On February 8, 2002, Venus filed a Certification in support of its Request pursuant to Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's Rules. The Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed and hereby approves Venus' Petition to Withdraw its Petitions. In view of Venus' withdrawal of the Petitions, the Oppositions of 360� Communications and Cellco to the Petitions filed on March 1, 2001 and February 8, 2001 respectively, and the Replies of Venus, filed on
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-847A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-847A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-847A1.txt
  • 22.227 Petitions to deny and limitations on settlements. (a) Procedures regarding petitions to deny long-form applications in the paging service will be governed by � 1.939. (b) The consideration that an individual or an entity will be permitted to receive for agreeing to withdraw an application or petition to deny will be limited by the provisions set forth in � 1.935. Revise � 22.228 to read as follows: � 22.228 Cellular Rural Service Area licenses subject to competitive bidding. Mutually exclusive initial applications for Cellular Rural Service Area licenses are subject to competitive bidding. The general competitive bidding procedures set forth in Part 1, Subpart Q of this chapter will apply unless otherwise provided in this subpart. Revise � 22.960 to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-847A1_Erratum.doc
  • 22.227 Petitions to deny and limitations on settlements. (a) Procedures regarding petitions to deny long-form applications in the paging service will be governed by � 1.939. (b) The consideration that an individual or an entity will be permitted to receive for agreeing to withdraw an application or petition to deny will be limited by the provisions set forth in � 1.935. Revise � 22.228 to read as follows: � 22.228 Cellular Rural Service Area licenses subject to competitive bidding. Mutually exclusive initial applications for Cellular Rural Service Area licenses are subject to competitive bidding. The general competitive bidding procedures set forth in Part 1, Subpart Q of this chapter will apply unless otherwise provided in this subpart. Revise � 22.960 to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-129A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-129A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-129A2.txt
  • services (i.e., section 1.929(d)) do not classify elimination or deletion of a site as a ``major'' change requiring engineering analysis or frequency coordination, and that the PLMRS service should be treated in the same manner. AMTA concurs with API and asks the Commission to modify section 1.929(c)(4)(i) to permit licensees to delete a frequency from an authorization without coordination. Section 1.935 - Requirements relating to withdrawal of certain applications and pleadings. CTIA and RCA also request elimination of section 1.935, which requires applicants to obtain Commission approval of agreements to withdraw applications, petitions, informal objections, or other pleadings against an application. They argue that the approval process often causes lengthy delays and is unnecessary in a competitive CMRS market, particularly when
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-129A2_Erratum.doc
  • services (i.e., section 1.929(d)) do not classify elimination or deletion of a site as a ``major'' change requiring engineering analysis or frequency coordination, and that the PLMRS service should be treated in the same manner. AMTA concurs with API and asks the Commission to modify section 1.929(c)(4)(i) to permit licensees to delete a frequency from an authorization without coordination. Section 1.935 - Requirements relating to withdrawal of certain applications and pleadings. CTIA and RCA also request elimination of section 1.935, which requires applicants to obtain Commission approval of agreements to withdraw applications, petitions, informal objections, or other pleadings against an application. They argue that the approval process often causes lengthy delays and is unnecessary in a competitive CMRS market, particularly when
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1720A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1720A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1720A1.txt
  • Add Additional Contour Coverage in Cellular Market Areas Nos. 19B (Denver, CO MSA) and 352B (Colorado-5, Elbert), File No. 0001026175. On March 17, 2003, Elbert sought to withdraw its Petition by filing a Corrected Withdrawal of Petition to Dismiss or Deny (Withdrawal Request). On April 24, 2003, Elbert filed a Declaration in Support of its Withdrawal Request pursuant to Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �1.935(a) Pursuant to Section 4(i) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. � 154(i), and Sections 0.331 and 1.935(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331 and 1.935(a), the Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed and hereby approves Elbert's request to withdraw its Petition. In light of our approval
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1775A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1775A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1775A1.txt
  • ``dismissal with prejudice'' of the designated pleadings. 47 U.S.C. � 309(d). See ``Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Waives Limitations on Payments in Settlement Agreements Among Parties In Contested Licensing Cases,'' Public Notice, DA 99-745, 14 FCC Rcd 6551 (WTB rel. Apr. 16, 1999) (Settlement Window Public Notice). In the Settlement Window Public Notice, the Bureau provided for a limited waiver of Sections 1.935(a) and 1.935(b) of the Commission's Rules, allowing parties to resolve certain contested licensing proceedings by settlement without limiting the consideration promised, paid, or received. 47 C.F.R. � 0.331. PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 445 12th St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 News Media Information 202 / 418-0500 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov TTY: 1-888-835-5322 * + ( ) / 7 8 � � �
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1791A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1791A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1791A1.txt
  • Colorado Cellular, Inc. for Authority to Construct and Operate a Cellular Station in Market No. 349A, Colorado 2-Logan RSA, File No. 0001120721. On February 6, 2003, Sagir sought to withdraw its Petition by filing a Request to Withdraw Petition to Deny (Withdrawal Request). On May 6, 2003, Sagir filed an Affidavit in Support of its Withdrawal Request pursuant to Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's rules. Pursuant to Section 4(i) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 0.331 and 1.935(a) of the Commission's rules, the Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed and hereby approves Sagir's request to withdraw its Petition. In light of our approval of Sagir's request to withdraw its Petition, we dismiss
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1941A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1941A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1941A1.txt
  • prejudice'' of the Application for Review. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(d). See ``Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Waives Limitations on Payments in Settlement Agreements Among Parties in Contested Licensing Cases,'' Public Notice, DA 99-745, 14 FCC Rcd 6551 (WTB rel. Apr. 16, 1999) (Settlement Window Public Notice). In the Settlement Window Public Notice, the Bureau provided for a limited waiver of Sections 1.935(a) and 1.935(b) of the Commission's Rules, allowing parties to resolve certain contested licensing proceedings by settlement without limiting the consideration promised, paid, or received. 47 C.F.R. � 0.331. PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 445 12th St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 News Media Information 202 / 418-0500 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov TTY: 1-888-835-5322 R S | } � � ��PNG r v ��"r�9
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-224A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-224A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-224A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit " " " " " " h DA 03-224 January 28, 2003 WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUREAU APPROVES WITHDRAWAL OF APPLICATION FOR REVIEW FILED BY N.E. CELLULAR COLORADO, INC. Pursuant to sections 0.331 and 1.935(a) and (b) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331 and 1.935(a) and (b), the Commercial Wireless Division (Division) hereby approves a request filed by N.E. Colorado Cellular, Inc. (NECC) on January 24, 2003 to withdraw its Application for Review filed on December 10, 2001. NECC's Application for Review requests review of an order on reconsideration released by the Division
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2374A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2374A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2374A1.txt
  • Dismiss or Deny (``Petition 2'') the Application of Morris for assignment of SMR Call Sign WNFY616 to Nextel, ULS File No. 0001183564. By letter dated July 15, 2003, Duncan requested the withdrawal of both Petition 1 and Petition 2, and all related adverse pleadings in these proceedings. As part of his request, Duncan provided a certification in accordance with section 1.935(a), 47 C.F.R. � 1.935(a), of the Commission's rules. The Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed and hereby approves Duncan's request to withdraw Petition 1 and Petition 2, and all related adverse pleadings in these proceedings. Pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 310(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 310(d), and section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3844A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3844A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3844A1.txt
  • 5028 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W. Suite 301 Washington, D.C. 20016 Stephen L. Earnest Regulatory Counsel BellSouth Corporation 675 West Peachtree Street Suite 4300 Atlanta, GA 30375-0001 Re: WC Docket No. 02-215 Dear Messrs. Belendiuk and Earnest: In response to an investigation by the staff of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (Bureau) into facts and circumstances that may have triggered application of section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, on September 30, 2003, BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. (BellSouth) filed a letter by which BellSouth, pursuant to section 1.935, seeks approval of its ``refraining from filing an opposition'' in the license transfer proceeding involving WorldCom, Inc. (WorldCom). The filing included two attachments consisting of a settlement agreement between BellSouth and WorldCom, and a Motion for Approval with
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3845A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3845A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3845A1.txt
  • Wisconsin Avenue, N.W. Suite 301 Washington, D.C. 20016 Ann H. Rakestraw Assistant General Counsel Verizon 1515 North Courthouse Road Suite 500 Arlington, VA 22201-2909 Re: WC Docket No. 02-215 Dear Mr. Belendiuk and Ms. Rakestraw: In response to an investigation by the staff of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (Bureau) into facts and circumstances that may have triggered application of section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, on October 3, 2003, Verizon filed a letter by which Verizon, pursuant to section 1.935, seeks approval of its ``refraining from filing an opposition'' in the license transfer proceeding involving WorldCom, Inc. (WorldCom). The filing included two attachments consisting of a settlement agreement between Verizon and WorldCom, and a supporting affidavit. On October 9, 2003, WorldCom
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3846A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3846A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3846A1.txt
  • 5028 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W. Suite 301 Washington, D.C. 20016 Jim Lamoureux Senior Counsel SBC Telecommunications, Inc. 1401 I Street NW 4th Floor Washington, DC 20005 Re: WC Docket No. 02-215 Dear Messrs. Belendiuk and Lamoureux: In response to an investigation by the staff of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (Bureau) into facts and circumstances that may have triggered application of section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, on October 3, 2003, SBC Telecommunications, Inc. (SBC) filed a ``Request for Approval to Withdraw an Opposition not Asserted'' in the license transfer proceeding involving WorldCom, Inc. (WorldCom). The filing included two attachments consisting of a settlement agreement between SBC and WorldCom, and a supporting affidavit. On October 9, 2003, WorldCom (dba MCI) filed a letter
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4057A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4057A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4057A1.txt
  • settlement agreement contains information that would not normally be disclosed to the public, and because BellSouth, SBC, and Verizon voluntarily submitted the agreements to the Commission at staff's request, the agreements are categorically protected from disclosure under Critical Mass. Ms. Snyder claims that Critical Mass is inapposite because the agreements were required to be submitted to the Commission under section 1.935 of the Commission's rules. In separate rulings today, however, the Bureau finds that the agreements are not covered by section 1.935. Even if we were to conclude that the agreements were required to be submitted to the Commission, we find that public disclosure of the agreements is likely to impair the Commission's ability to obtain necessary information in the future
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-446A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-446A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-446A1.txt
  • (ITA) requested rescission of the grant. ITA argues that the grant was improper with respect to the Readymix frequency because VSS's requested location is too close to the authorized site of Readymix's Station WPRI751, and improper with respect to the Sunset frequencies because VSS's requested location is too close to the site requested in the earlier-filed Sunset application. Discussion. Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules permits parties that have filed applications that are mutually exclusive with one or more applications to enter into an agreement to resolve the mutual exclusivity. In addition, parties that have filed a petition to deny an application and then seek to withdraw or request dismissal of the petition must obtain the approval of the Commission. We
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-446A1_Erratum.doc
  • (ITA) requested rescission of the grant. ITA argues that the grant was improper with respect to the Readymix frequency because VSS's requested location is too close to the authorized site of Readymix's Station WPRI751, and improper with respect to the Sunset frequencies because VSS's requested location is too close to the site requested in the earlier-filed Sunset application. Discussion. Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules permits parties that have filed applications that are mutually exclusive with one or more applications to enter into an agreement to resolve the mutual exclusivity. In addition, parties that have filed a petition to deny an application and then seek to withdraw or request dismissal of the petition must obtain the approval of the Commission. We
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-768A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-768A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-768A1.txt
  • D. Warden (Warden). On January 8, 2003, Nextel entered into an asset exchange agreement with Warden for the relocation of stations WNIC886 and WNIC914. On January 10, 2003, Nextel filed a request to withdraw its Petition for Reconsideration against Warden. On February 10, 2003, Nextel submitted a copy of the asset exchange agreement and a certification of compliance with Section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 1.935. Warden filed a certification of compliance with Section 1.935 on February 19, 2003. The Commercial Wireless Division's Policy and Rules Branch has reviewed and hereby approves Nextel's request to withdraw its Petition for Reconsideration pursuant to Section 4(i) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. � 154(i), and Sections 0.331 and 1.935(a) of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1031A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1031A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1031A1.txt
  • Mobility Division and the Public Safety and Critical Infrastructure Division have reviewed the Joint Motion and find that it raises no substantial or material questions of fact under Section 309(d) of the Communications Act, as amended. Each Party filed individual certifications in support of the Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement, including the withdrawal of all pleadings pursuant to Section 1.935 of the Commission's rules. Pursuant to Sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's rules, and the statements contained in the Joint Motion for Settlement and in the related certifications, the Mobility Division and the Public Safety and Critical Infrastructure Division together are approving the Settlement Agreement entered into by the Parties on January 19, 2004. Pursuant to the terms of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1260A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1260A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1260A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit DA 04-1260 May 3, 2004 WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUREAU MOBILITY DIVISION APPROVES REQUESTS FOR WITHDRAWAL OF PLEADINGS Pursuant to Sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's rules, the Mobility Division approves (1) a request filed by Mobile Relay Associates (MRA) on April 23, 2004, to dismiss, with prejudice, its petition to deny filed on September 22, 2003 (Petition); and (2) a request filed by James A. Kay, Jr. (Kay) on April 23, 2004, to dismiss, with prejudice, his opposition filed on October 7,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1300A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1300A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1300A1.txt
  • protected from public disclosure. The Bureau's Mobility Division has reviewed the Settlement Agreement and the Withdrawal Request and finds that they raise no substantial or material questions of fact under Section 309(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Each party filed individual certifications in support of the Settlement Agreement and the withdrawal of all pleadings pursuant to Section 1.935 of the Commission's rules. Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's rules, and based on the statements contained in the Withdrawal Request, the Mobility Division hereby approves the withdrawal of and dismisses the Application for Review filed by Nextel Communications, Inc. on December 21, 2001; all other pleadings filed in this matter are hereby deemed moot and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2019A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2019A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2019A1.txt
  • passes within several hundred feet of the tower compound. The Petitioners assert that the new tower will adversely affect the Trail because the tower will be visible from several sections of the Trail. We note that NPS also made similar arguments in pleadings that it has requested to withdraw. We have reviewed the Request and MOU, in accordance with Section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, and grant the request to withdraw the NPS comments and May 27 letter. We therefore do not consider these pleadings with respect to this or any other issue. The State does not dispute, and we concur with, the MDSHPO's recommendation that the Trail is eligible for inclusion on the National Register. The MDSHPO further recommends that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2190A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2190A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2190A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit DA 04-2190 July 21, 2004 WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUREAU PUBLIC SAFETY AND CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE DIVISION APPROVES REQUESTS FOR WITHDRAWAL OF PLEADINGS Pursuant to Sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's Rules, the Public Safety and Critical Infrastructure Division (Division) approves (1) a request filed by Mobile Relay Associates (MRA) on April 23, 2004, to dismiss with prejudice its opposition to petition for partial reconsideration filed on August 20, 2003; (2) an amendment filed by MRA on April 23, 2004, to amend its petition for reconsideration filed August
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3027A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3027A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3027A1.txt
  • Commission, 13 FCC Rcd 17877 (WTB 1998) (``When the short-form filing deadline passes, the anti-collusion rule applies to all applicants with submitted short-form applications . . . We . . . remind applicants that submitted applications, once the short-form deadline passes, trigger application of the anti-collusion rule even if they are later withdrawn.''). Response at 2-7. Northeast's reliance on section 1.935 of the rules to support its claim that it ceased being an applicant for the purposes of the anti-collusion rule lacks merit. Response at 5-6. Section 1.935 relates to agreements among mutually exclusive applicants to dismiss their applications and clearly is inapplicable here. Northeast's further reliance on Public Notice, DA 02-659, 17 FCC Rcd 5,140 (WTB rel. March 19, 2002)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3027A1_Erratum.doc
  • Commission, 13 FCC Rcd 17877 (WTB 1998) (``When the short-form filing deadline passes, the anti-collusion rule applies to all applicants with submitted short-form applications . . . We . . . remind applicants that submitted applications, once the short-form deadline passes, trigger application of the anti-collusion rule even if they are later withdrawn.''). Response at 2-7. Northeast's reliance on section 1.935 of the rules to support its claim that it ceased being an applicant for the purposes of the anti-collusion rule lacks merit. Response at 5-6. Section 1.935 relates to agreements among mutually exclusive applicants to dismiss their applications and clearly is inapplicable here. Northeast's further reliance on Public Notice, DA 02-659, 17 FCC Rcd 5,140 (WTB rel. March 19, 2002)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3690A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3690A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3690A1.txt
  • November 8, 2004 Request to Withdraw a Consolidated Application for Review filed by Margaret Snyder (Withdrawal Request). On January 20, 2004, Margaret Snyder filed a Consolidated Application for Review of three Wireless Telecommunications Bureau letter rulings. In the BellSouth Letter Ruling, the Bureau found that a settlement agreement between WorldCom, Inc. and BellSouth Corporation was not covered by the Section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 1.935. In the SBC Letter Ruling, the Bureau found that a settlement agreement between WorldCom, Inc. and SBC Telecommunications, Inc. was not covered by Section 1.935. In the Verizon Letter Ruling, the Bureau found that a settlement agreement between WorldCom, Inc. and Verizon was not covered by Section 1.935. The Mobility Division has
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3701A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3701A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3701A1.txt
  • Request) and the Settlement Agreement. The Mobility Division has reviewed the Settlement Agreement and the Withdrawal Request and finds that they raise no substantial or material questions of fact under Section 309(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Each party filed individual certifications in support of the Settlement Agreement and the withdrawal of all pleadings pursuant to Section 1.935 of the Commission's rules. Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's rules, and based on the statements contained in the Withdrawal Request, the Mobility Division hereby approves the withdrawal of, and dismisses with prejudice, the Petition for Reconsideration filed by Supreme Radio Communications, Inc. on May 16, 2002; all other pleadings filed in that matter are hereby
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-383A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-383A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-383A1.txt
  • Petition to Deny the application of CC Communications for Cellular Unserved Area for Market 543 B, Nevada 1 - Humbolt RSA, Call Sign KNKN223 including coverage in NV 4 -Mineral RSA. On December 30, 2003, Southwestco filed its Request for Approval of Withdrawal of Petition to Deny. Soutwestco also filed a declaration in support of its request pursuant to section 1.935 of the Commission's rules. The Mobility Division has reviewed the Request for Approval of Withdrawal and finds that it raises no substantial or material questions of fact under Section 309(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Pursuant to sections 0.131, 0.331, and 1.935 of the Commission's rules, and the statements contained in the Request for Approval of Withdrawal
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-444A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-444A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-444A1.txt
  • to Deny (``Petition'') filed by Mount Mansfield Television, Inc. (``Mansfield''). Mansfield filed the Petition on September 22, 2003, to deny the long-form application of Vermont Telephone Company, Inc. (``Vermont Telephone'') for Lower 700 MHz Band licenses (Auction No. 49). By letter dated October 28, 2003, Mansfield requested the withdrawal of the Petition. Mansfield provided a certification in accordance with section 1.935(a), 47 C.F.R. � 1.935, of the Commission's rules. The Mobility Division has reviewed the letter and finds that it raises no substantial material questions of fact under Section 309(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Pursuant to sections 0.131, 0.331, and 1.935 of the Commission's rules, and the statements contained in the letter, the Mobility Division hereby approves
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-52A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-52A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-52A1.txt
  • Reply, and filed a Supplement to the Reply. PCSP filed an Opposition to the Request for Leave and Supplement on January 21, 2003. On December 30, 2003, Petitioners filed a Request for Approval to Withdraw with prejudice their above referenced Application for Review and Petition for Reconsideration. Petitioners also filed a certification in support of thier request pursuant to section 1.935 of the Commission's rules. On January 8, 2004, PCSP filed a certification in support of Petitioners' request pursuant to section 1.935. The Mobility Division has reviewed the Request for Approval to Withdraw and finds that it raises no substantial or material questions of fact under Section 309(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Pursuant to sections 0.331 and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-752A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-752A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-752A1.txt
  • Case Nos. 04-1067 and 04-1068, respectively. Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, Petitioners will file motions to dismiss, with prejudice, their Notice of Appeal and Petition for Review of the Assignment Order. Petitioners and NextWave filed certifications in support of Petitioners' Request to Withdraw the Petition to Deny and for Approval of the Settlement Agreement pursuant to section 1.935 of the Commission's rules. The Mobility Division has reviewed the Request to Withdraw the Petition to Deny and for Approval of the Settlement Agreement and finds that it raises no substantial or material questions of fact under Section 309(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Pursuant to sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's rules, and the statements
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1995A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1995A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1995A1.txt
  • TLC subsequently withdrew its pleadings to permit the Commission to act on the underlying assignment application. The Mobility Division has reviewed the TLC Request and Havens Request, and finds that they raise no substantial or material questions of fact under Section 309(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 309(d). Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331 and 1.935, and based on the statements contained in the TLC Request and Havens Request, the Mobility Division hereby approves the withdrawal of, and dismisses with prejudice, the Havens Petition to Deny filed on February 28, 2003, with respect to the above-referenced assignment application. All other pleadings filed in this matter are
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2492A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2492A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2492A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit DA 06-2492 December 12, 2006 WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUREAU MOBILITY DIVISION APPROVES REQUESTS FOR WITHDRAWAL OF PLEADINGS Pursuant to Sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's Rules, the Mobility Division (Division) approves (1) a request filed by James A. Kay, Jr. (Kay) on April 23, 2004, to dismiss with prejudice his Protest and Objection to Application filed on May 29, 2003; (2) a request filed by Kay to dismiss with prejudice his Reply to Opposition filed on June 30, 2003; (3) a request
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-303A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-303A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-303A1.txt
  • honor the terms of a prior settlement agreement resolving a civil dispute with the Petitioners (``Prior Settlement''). The Petitioners allege that, while attempting to collect the funds owed to them under the Prior Settlement, Foster refused to make the payment and argued that the Prior Settlement involved the dismissal of an objection filed in a Commission proceeding, in violation of 1.935 the Commission's rules (``the greenmail rule''). Several pleadings were filed in response to the Petition for Reconsideration. On October 31, 2006, the Petitioners requested to withdraw the Petition for Reconsideration. The Petitioners, after filing a lawsuit in the District of Columbia to collect the funds owed to them by Foster under the terms of the Prior Settlement, have resolved the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-846A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-846A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-846A1.txt
  • the Application on public notice as accepted for filing on July 26, 2006. Subsequently, CommNet timely-filed a petition seeking to deny the Application because it proposes a service area that overlaps with the protected CGSA of Station KNKN394, which is licensed to CommNet in the South Dakota 1-Harding CMA. C&CC opposed the Petition and CommNet filed a reply. Under section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, parties that have filed a petition to deny an application must request Commission approval to dismiss or withdraw the petition. In the request, the parties must submit any written agreement related to the dismissal or withdrawal as well as affidavits certifying that no consideration has or will be exchanged in return for withdrawing or dismissing the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-855A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-855A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-855A1.txt
  • request (Paxson Request). On February 22, 2007, MSTV/Tucson filed a request to withdraw the MSTV/Tucson Application for Review, and each certified that it received no consideration for the withdrawal (MSTV/Tucson Request). The Division has reviewed the Paxson Request and the MSTV/Tucson Request and finds that neither raises any substantial or material questions of fact, and that each complies with Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 0.331 of the Commission's rules, the Division hereby approves the dismissal of the Paxson Application for Review, and the withdrawal of the MSTV/Tucson Application for Review. All other pleadings filed in these matters are hereby deemed moot. . Action by the Deputy Chief, Mobility Division. In the Matter of Aloha Partners, L.P.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-899A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-899A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-899A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Settlement Agreement and Request for Waiver Of Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules WWC License L.L.C. Alltel Communications of the Southwest Limited Partnership Commnet Wireless, LLC McElroy Electronics Corporation McElroy Electronics Corporation Smith Bagley, Inc. Phase II Unserved Area Applications For New Mexico 3 RSA (Catron) Market No. 555, Block A AND WWC License L.L.C. Phase II Unserved Area Applications For New Mexico 6 RSA (Lincoln) Market No. 558,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1108A1.pdf
  • by public notice, may specify a limited period before the filing of short-form applications (FCC Form 175) during which applicants may enter into a settlement to resolve their mutual exclusivity. Any applications that are mutually exclusive under the performance requirements adopted in the 700 MHz Second Report and Order, as well as certain other pleadings, will be subject to Section 1.935 of the rules (47 C.F.R. � 1.935). Under that rule, parties that have filed applications that are mutually exclusive with one or more other applications must request Commission approval to dismiss or withdraw the applications. Parties are required to submit any written agreement related to the dismissal or withdrawal as well as affidavits certifying that no money or other consideration
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1165A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1165A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1165A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit " " " " " " " DA 08-1165 May 15, 2008 WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUREAU APPROVES SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN KEYSTONE WIRELESS, INC. AND VERIZON WIRELESS (VAW) LLC Pursuant to section 4(i) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. � 154(i), and Sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 0.331 and 1.935, the Mobility Division (Division) of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (Bureau) hereby approves the Joint Request for Approval of Settlement Agreement (Settlement Agreement) filed by Keystone Wireless, Inc. (Keystone) and Verizon Wireless (VAW) LLC (Verizon) on May 12, 2008. Between September, 2005 and January, 2006, Keystone and Verizon collectively filed four
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1013A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1013A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1013A1.txt
  • states that its ``counsel was unaware of the extension agreement and proceeded to file the [P]etition . . .'' and that, ``[u]pon Smith Bagley's counsel learning of the extension agreement, [Smith Bagley] unilaterally withdrew the petition to deny.'' In its Request to Withdraw, Smith Bagley includes a certification in support of its request to withdraw the Petition pursuant to Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules. We have reviewed the Request to Withdraw and find that it raises no substantial or material question of fact under Section 309(d) of the Communications Act, as amended. The Division also finds that the Request to Withdraw complies with section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules. Accordingly, pursuant to sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's Rules,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1013A1_Rcd.pdf
  • market.7Further, Smith Bagley states that its"counsel was unaware of the extension agreement and proceeded to file the [P]etition . . ." and that, "[u]pon Smith Bagley's counsel learning of the extension agreement, [Smith Bagley] unilaterally withdrew the petition to deny."8In its Request to Withdraw, Smith Bagley includes a certification in support of its request to withdraw the Petition9pursuant to Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules.10 1Petition to Deny of Smith Bagley, Inc. (filed Jan. 2, 2009) ("Petition"). 2Application for Modification of License, File No. 0003657382 (filed Nov. 24, 2008). 3Petition at 1. 447 C.F.R. � 22.912; Petition at 1-2. 5Request to Withdraw Petition to Deny of Smith Bagley, Inc. (filed Jan. 6, 2009). 6Amendment to Request to WithdrawPetition to Deny of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1061A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1061A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1061A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Settlement Agreement and Request for Waiver Of Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules Banana Communications, LLC and The United States Department of Agriculture Application for Consent to Assignment of PCS Licenses KNLH651 and KNLH653 From Northstar Technology, LLC to Banana Communications, LLC ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) File No. 0001941306 ORDER Adopted: May 13, 2009 Released: May 13, 2009 By the Deputy
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1061A1_Rcd.pdf
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1061 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Settlement Agreement and Request for Waiver Of Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules Banana Communications, LLC and The United States Department of Agriculture Application for Consent to Assignment of PCS Licenses KNLH651 and KNLH653 From Northstar Technology, LLC to Banana Communications, LLC ))))))))))))File No. 0001941306 ORDER Adopted: May 13, 2009 Released: May 13, 2009 By the Deputy Chief, Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau: I. INTRODUCTION 1. In this Order,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1307A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1307A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1307A1.txt
  • Application and notification forms; electronic and manual filing. 1.915 General application requirements. 1.917 Who may sign applications. 1.919 Ownership information. 1.923 Content of applications. 1.924 Quiet zones. 1.925 Waivers. 1.926 Application processing; initial procedures. 1.927 Amendment of applications. 1.929 Classification of filings as major or minor. 1.931 Application for special temporary authority. 1.933 Public notices. 1.934 Defective applications and dismissal. 1.935 Agreements to dismiss applications, amendments or pleadings. 1.937 Repetitious or conflicting applications. 1.939 Petitions to deny. 1.945 License grants. 1.946 Construction and coverage requirements. 1.947 Modification of licenses. 1.948 Assignment of authorization or transfer of control, notification of consummation. 1.949 Application for renewal of license. 1.951 Duty to respond to official communications. 1.955 Termination of authorizations. 1.956 Settlement conferences. 1.957
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1455A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1455A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1455A1.txt
  • Ms. Parsons: On June 16, 2008, FiberTower Corporation (FiberTower) filed a request to withdraw a petition opposing conditional authority for applications for Microwave Industrial/Business Pool stations filed by Metropolitan Area Networks, Inc. (MAN). For the reasons stated below, we grant the Withdrawal Request. We have reviewed the Withdrawal Request and find that FiberTower has made the certifications required by Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's Rules. Furthermore, we find that withdrawal of the Petition would be in the public interest because it would terminate litigation concerning the applications in question. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i), 309, and Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1455A1_Rcd.pdf
  • Dear Ms. Parsons: On June 16, 2008, FiberTower Corporation (FiberTower) filed a request1to withdraw a petition2 opposing conditional authority for applications for Microwave Industrial/Business Pool stations filed by Metropolitan Area Networks, Inc. (MAN). For the reasons stated below, we grant the Withdrawal Request. We have reviewed the Withdrawal Request and find that FiberTower has made the certifications required by Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's Rules.3Furthermore, we find that withdrawal of the Petition would be in the public interest because it would terminate litigation concerning the applications in question. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i), 309, and Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. �
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2091A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2091A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2091A1.txt
  • response indicating its desire to have the Lease Application withdrawn unless and until Indian Springs and Utopian resolved certain issues. On September 15, 2009, Indian Springs filed the Withdrawal Request. On September 16, 2009, Indian Springs supplemented its Withdrawal Request to provide a copy of the settlement agreement between itself and Utopian, as well as the affidavit required by Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's Rules. We have reviewed the Withdrawal Request and find that Indian Springs has provided a copy of the agreement between itself and Utopian and made the certifications required by Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's Rules. Furthermore, both Utopian and Clearwire have made the certifications required by Section 1.935(b) of the Commission's Rules. In conjunction with its certification,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2091A1_Rcd.pdf
  • Utopian Wireless Corporation (filed Sep. 4, 2009). 8Response of Clearwire Corporation (filed Sep. 3, 2009) 12005 TonyS. Lee, Esq., et al. On September 15, 2009, Indian Springs filed the Withdrawal Request.9On September 16, 2009, Indian Springs supplemented its Withdrawal Request to provide a copy of the settlement agreement between itself and Utopian, as well as the affidavit required by Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's Rules.10 We have reviewed the Withdrawal Request and find that Indian Springs has provided a copy of the agreement between itself and Utopian and made the certifications required by Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's Rules.11Furthermore, both Utopian and Clearwire have made the certifications required by Section 1.935(b) of the Commission's Rules.12In conjunction with its certification, Clearwire now
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1792A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1792A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1792A1.txt
  • and the 800 MHz TA as available for licensing. Because they are in the SMR Category, Xcel reaffirmed its request for a waiver of the eligibility and use restrictions set forth in Section 90.617(d) of the Commission Rules. Xcel's Request. Xcel claims that its unique circumstances meet the Commission's requirements for grant of a waiver, as set forth in Section 1.935(b)(3)(i)-(ii) of the Commission's Rules. Specifically, it states that the purpose of the SMR eligibility and use restrictions - i.e. to ensure delivery of SMR service --would not be frustrated by the Commission's grant of the waiver, as Sprint is currently providing SMR service on several frequencies in the Minneapolis area. Moreover, the replacement frequencies have been recommended by Sprint and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1792A1_Rcd.pdf
  • and the 800 MHz TA as available for licensing.12 Because they are in the SMR Category, Xcel reaffirmed its request for a waiver of the eligibility and use restrictions set forth in Section 90.617(d) of the Commission Rules.13 Xcel's Request. Xcel claims that its unique circumstances meet the Commission's requirements for grant of a waiver, as set forth in Section 1.935(b)(3)(i)-(ii) of the Commission's Rules.14Specifically,it states that the purpose of the SMR eligibility and use restrictions �i.e.to ensure delivery of SMR service --would not be frustrated by the Commission's grant of the waiver, as Sprint is currently providing SMR service on several frequencies in the Minneapolis area.15Moreover, the replacement frequencies have been recommended by Sprint and 800 MHz TA as suitable
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-661A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-661A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-661A1.txt
  • this proceeding. On March 31, 2010, the Georgia Partners filed a request to withdraw their petition to deny and all filings related thereto. The Georgia Partners specifically requested that ``the Commission not consider any concerns or objections raised in the [Georgia Partners'] Petition to Deny and that the FCC grant the above-referenced applications.'' In accordance with the provisions of section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, the Georgia Partners submitted declarations from an officer of each of the Georgia Partners certifying under penalty of perjury that none of the Georgia Partners and none of their principals have received or will receive any money or other consideration in exchange for the withdrawal of the Georgia Partners petition to deny. Verizon Wireless submitted a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-661A1_Rcd.pdf
  • participated in this proceeding. On March 31, 2010, the Georgia Partners filed a request to withdraw their petition to deny and all filings related thereto.295The Georgia Partners specifically requested that "the Commission not consider any concerns or objections raised in the [Georgia Partners'] Petition to Deny and that the FCC grant the above-referenced applications."296In accordance with the provisions of section 1.935 of the Commission's rules,297the Georgia Partners submitted declarations from an officer of each of the Georgia Partners certifying under penalty of perjury that none of the Georgia Partners and none of their principals have received or will receive any money or other consideration in exchange for the withdrawal of the Georgia Partners petition to deny.298Verizon 290Rulesand Policies on Foreign Participation
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1447A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1447A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1447A1.txt
  • 100 Plano, TX 75074 Dear Mr. Youngblood: On May 27, 2011, Micronet Communications, Inc. (Micronet) filed a request to withdraw a petition opposing an application filed by Teltranet Licenses, LLC (Teltranet) to modify Common Carrier Fixed Point to Point Microwave Station WPZB934. For the reasons stated below, we grant the Withdrawal Request. Micronet has made the certifications required by Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's Rules. Teltranet has also made the certifications required by Section 1.935(b) of the Commission's Rules. Furthermore, we find that withdrawal of the Petition would be in the public interest because it would terminate litigation concerning the application in question. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1447A1_Rcd.pdf
  • , Inc. 720 F Avenue, Suite 100 Plano, TX 75074 Dear Mr. Youngblood: On May 27, 2011, Micronet Communications, Inc. (Micronet) filed a request1to withdraw a petition2opposing anapplication filed byTeltranet Licenses, LLC (Teltranet)to modify Common Carrier Fixed Point to Point Microwave Station WPZB934.3For the reasons stated below, we grant the Withdrawal Request. Micronet has made the certifications required by Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's Rules.4 Teltranet has also made the certifications required by Section 1.935(b) of the Commission's Rules.5 Furthermore, we find that withdrawal of the Petition would be in the public interest because it would terminate litigation concerning the application in question. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1448A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1448A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1448A1.txt
  • Inc. 720 F Avenue, Suite 100 Plano, TX 75074 Dear Mr. Youngblood: On February 25, 2011, Micronet Communications, Inc. (Micronet) filed a request to withdraw a petition opposing an application filed by WECOM, Inc. (WECOM) to modify Microwave Industrial/Business Pool Station WQKP514. For the reasons stated below, we grant the Withdrawal Request. Micronet has made the certifications required by Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's Rules. WECOM has also made the certifications required by Section 1.935(b) of the Commission's Rules. Furthermore, we find that withdrawal of the Petition would be in the public interest because it would terminate litigation concerning the application in question. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1448A1_Rcd.pdf
  • Youngblood Systems Engineer Micronet Communications , Inc. 720 F Avenue, Suite 100 Plano, TX 75074 Dear Mr. Youngblood: On February 25, 2011, Micronet Communications, Inc. (Micronet) filed a request1to withdraw a petition2opposing an application filed byWECOM, Inc. (WECOM)to modifyMicrowave Industrial/Business Pool Station WQKP514.3For the reasons stated below, we grant the Withdrawal Request. Micronet has made the certifications required by Section 1.935(a) of the Commission's Rules.4 WECOM has also made the certifications required by Section 1.935(b) of the Commission's Rules.5 Furthermore, we find that withdrawal of the Petition would be in the public interest because it would terminate litigation concerning the application in question. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-271A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-271A1.txt
  • withdrawal of its pleadings against the PRTC application. On December 14, 2010, Am�rica M�vil, S.A.B. de C.V. and PRTC filed declarations that neither one had paid or will pay any money or other consideration in exchange for the withdrawal or dismissal of NatTel's petition to deny and petition for reconsideration. We find that the submissions satisfy the requirements of section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 1.935, and grant approval for the withdrawal of NatTel's petition to deny and petition for reconsideration. Attachment A: Application and Licenses the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Is Granting. Attachment B: Instructions for Searching for the Application Listed in Attachment A Using ULS. Attachment C: Instructions for Searching for Granted License Listed in Attachment A
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-271A1_Rcd.pdf
  • withdrawal of its pleadings against the PRTC application. On December 14, 2010, Am�rica M�vil, S.A.B. de C.V. and PRTC filed declarations that neither one had paid or will pay any money or other consideration in exchange for the withdrawal or dismissal of NatTel's petition to deny and petition for reconsideration. We find that the submissions satisfy the requirements of section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 1.935, and grant approval for the withdrawal of NatTel's petition to deny and petition for reconsideration. 1399 Attachment A: Application and Licenses the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Is Granting. Attachment B: Instructions for Searching for the Application Listed in Attachment A Using ULS. Attachment C: Instructions for Searching for Granted License Listed in Attachment
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-276A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-276A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-276A1.txt
  • other consideration for the withdrawal of its pleadings against the PRTC application. On December 14, 2010, Am�rica M�vil, S.A.B. de C.V. and PRTC filed declarations that neither one had paid or will pay any money or other consideration in exchange for the withdrawal or dismissal of NatTel's Petition to Deny. We find that the submissions satisfy the requirements of section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 1.935, and grant approval for the withdrawal of NatTel's Petition to Deny. PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 445 12th St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 News Media Information 202 / 418-0500 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov TTY: 1-888-835-5322 � � � # $ � ... � � � ��PNG r v ��"r�9 I'6� �d�Y�͆aX ���; Wh� �X,�aX���y�]\\.W`h���va6l!
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-276A1_Rcd.pdf
  • contact Genevieve Ross, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Broadband Division, at (202) 418-1305, for questions regarding legal matters and licensing issues. -FCC - and PRTC filed declarations that neither one had paid or will pay any money or other consideration in exchange for the withdrawal or dismissal of NatTel's Petition to Deny. We find that the submissions satisfy the requirements of section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 1.935, and grant approval for the withdrawal of NatTel's Petition to Deny. 1432
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-305A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-305A1.txt
  • the same date, PacifiCorp affirmed that it had not received and would not receive, had not paid and would not pay, any money or other consideration, in exchange for requesting leave to withdraw the August 30, 2010, comments it filed against Wyoming's pending application. See File No. 0004366820, PacifiCorp Affidavit. We find that the submissions satisfy the requirements of section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 1.935, and grant approval for the withdrawal of Wyoming's petition to defer or condition action on PacifiCorp's pending Auction 87 application. 5 We also grant PacifiCorp's request for a waiver of section 20.9(a)(6) of the Commission's rules to permit operation on a non-common carrier and/or private, internal basis. Attachment B: Instructions for Searching
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-305A1_Rcd.pdf
  • the same date, PacifiCorp affirmed that it had not received and would not receive, had not paid and would not pay, any money or other consideration, in exchange for requesting leave to withdraw the August 30, 2010, comments it filed against Wyoming's pending application. See File No. 0004366820, PacifiCorp Affidavit. We find that the submissions satisfy the requirements of section 1.935 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 1.935, and grant approval for the withdrawal of Wyoming's petition to defer or condition action on PacifiCorp's pending Auction 87 application. 5 We also grant PacifiCorp's request for a waiver of section 20.9(a)(6) of the Commission's rules to permit operation on a non-common carrier and/or private, internal basis. 1873 Attachment B: Instructions for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253529A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253529A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253529A1.txt
  • fact remains that, as of August 28 and 29, WTB had not dismissed Northeast's application and it thus remained pending under the rules. When the Forfeiture Order is published in the FCC Record, it will contain the corrections referenced herein. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Davenport Chief, Investigations & Hearings Division Enforcement Bureau Response at 2-7. Northeast's reliance on section 1.935 of the rules to support its claim that it ceased being an applicant for the purposes of the anti-collusion rule lacks merit. Response at 5-6. Section 1.935 relates to agreements among mutually exclusive applicants to dismiss their applications and clearly is inapplicable here. Northeast's further reliance on Public Notice, DA 02-659, 17 FCC Rcd 5,140 (WTB rel. March 19, 2002)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267512A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267512A1.txt
  • File No. 0002444953, dated February 6, 2006 (collectively, the "Petitions"). Habeeb filed a Motion to Withdraw the Petitions on May 3, 2006. We have reviewed the Motion to Withdraw and find that it raises no substantial or material question of fact under section 309(d) of the Communications Act, as amended. 47 U.S.C. � 309(d). Accordingly, pursuant to sections 0.331 and 1.935 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331, 1.935, we approve Joseph C. Habeeb's Motion to Withdraw, filed on May 3, 2006, and dismiss with prejudice Habeeb's Petitions. 1 Purpose Action Parties Action Date File Number Full Assignment Z WBAP-KSCS Operating, Ltd. Radio License Holding IV, LLC Radio Service Code(s) Assignee: Assignor: Call Sign or Lead Call Sign:WNTW516 09/13/2006 0002478089
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-300791A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-300791A1.txt
  • Harinder R Cellco Partnership Radio Service Code(s) Assignee: Assignor: Call Sign or Lead Call Sign:KNLG743 08/09/2010 0003846143 AM CW Partitioning AND/OR Disaggregation M Alltel Communications, LLC NEATT Wireless, LLC Radio Service Code(s) Assignee: Assignor: Call Sign or Lead Call Sign:KNLG323 08/06/2010 0003987372 AA CW Page 2 1 1 Motion to offline application and hold in abeyance withdrawn, consistent with sec. 1.935. Purpose Action Parties Action Date File Number Full Assignment M Alltel Communications, LLC NEATT Wireless, LLC Radio Service Code(s) Assignee: Assignor: Call Sign or Lead Call Sign:KNLG319 08/06/2010 0003987374 AA CW Partitioning AND/OR Disaggregation M Verizon Wireless Tennessee Partnership NEATT Wireless, LLC Radio Service Code(s) Assignee: Assignor: Call Sign or Lead Call Sign:WPOK589 08/05/2010 0003987388 AA CW Partitioning AND/OR Disaggregation
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-113A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-113A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-113A1.txt
  • motion or upon request, in accordance with the policies, procedures, and standards set forth in subpart F of this part (see � 1.925 of this part). (c) Notifications and pending applications regarding spectrum leasing arrangements may be dismissed in accordance with the policies, procedures, and standards applicable to applications as set forth in subpart F of this part (see � 1.935 of this part). * * * * * PART 27 - MISCELLANEOUS WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES 8. The authority citation for Part 27 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309, 332, 336, and 337 unless otherwise noted. 9. Amend Section 27.4 by deleting the paragraph including and defining ``Band Manager.'' * * * *
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-113A1_Erratum.doc
  • motion or upon request, in accordance with the policies, procedures, and standards set forth in subpart F of this part (see � 1.925 of this part). (c) Notifications and pending applications regarding spectrum leasing arrangements may be dismissed in accordance with the policies, procedures, and standards applicable to applications as set forth in subpart F of this part (see � 1.935 of this part). * * * * * PART 27 - MISCELLANEOUS WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES 8. The authority citation for Part 27 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309, 332, 336, and 337 unless otherwise noted. 9. Amend Section 27.4 by deleting the paragraph including and defining ``Band Manager.'' * * * *
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-118A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-118A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-118A1.txt
  • Water's applications. Moreover, San Francisco maintains that its Objection should be treated as a request for a waiver of the Commission's rule regarding the dismissal of untimely filed applications. We disagree and address the arguments below. DISCUSSION Settlement Agreement San Francisco contends that the Division failed to consider the merits and equities in favor of accepting the Settlement Agreement. Section 1.935 of our Rules permits parties to file settlement agreements when applicants that have mutually exclusive applications enter into settlement agreements to resolve the mutual exclusivity. Also under Section 1.935, a party that has filed an informal objection against an application and then seeks to withdraw or request dismissal of the objection must obtain the approval of the Commission. In the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-319A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-319A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-319A1.txt
  • notify the Commission of the Oklahoma indictments. Margaret Snyder, Third Supplement to Petition to Deny Transfer of Licenses, Authorizations, and Certifications of WorldCom, Inc., WC Docket No. 02-215 (filed Oct. 8, 2003) (Snyder Third Supplement). Fourth, Ms. Snyder supplemented her petition to assert that the Commission should inquire into a possible violation of the Commission's ``greenmail'' rule, 47 C.F.R. � 1.935, in light of recent filings. Margaret Snyder, Fourth Supplement to Petition to Deny Transfer of Licenses, Authorizations, and Certifications of WorldCom, Inc. and Request to Inspect Documents, WC Docket No. 02-215 (filed Oct. 15, 2003) (Snyder Fourth Supplement). Fifth, Ms. Snyder supplemented her petition to assert that WorldCom violated Commission's ex parte notification rule, 47 C.F.R. � 1.1206(b)(2) by failing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-132A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-132A1.pdf
  • notice, may specify a limited period before the filing of short-form applications (FCC Form 175) during which applicants may enter into a settlement to resolve their mutual exclusivity. We stress that any applications that are mutually exclusive under the performance requirements we adopt in this Second Report and Order, as well as certain other pleadings, will be subject to Section 1.935 of the rules. Under that rule, parties that have filed applications that are mutually exclusive with one or more other applications must request Commission approval to dismiss or withdraw the applications. Parties are required to submit any written agreement related to the dismissal or withdrawal as well as affidavits certifying that no money or other consideration in excess of certain
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-132A1_Erratum.doc
  • notice, may specify a limited period before the filing of short-form applications (FCC Form 175) during which applicants may enter into a settlement to resolve their mutual exclusivity. We stress that any applications that are mutually exclusive under the performance requirements we adopt in this Second Report and Order, as well as certain other pleadings, will be subject to Section 1.935 of the rules. Under that rule, parties that have filed applications that are mutually exclusive with one or more other applications must request Commission approval to dismiss or withdraw the applications. Parties are required to submit any written agreement related to the dismissal or withdrawal as well as affidavits certifying that no money or other consideration in excess of certain
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-158A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-158A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-158A1.txt
  • third parties that propose areas overlapping with other applications will be deemed mutually exclusive, and will be resolved through an auction. The Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, by public notice, may specify a limited period before the filing of short-form applications (FCC Form 175) during which applicants may enter into a settlement to resolve their mutual exclusivity, subject to the provisions of �1.935 of this chapter. (2) Following this 30-day period, the original licensee and third parties can file license applications for remaining unserved areas where licenses have not been issued or for which there are no pending applications. If the original licensee or a third party files an application, that application will be placed on public notice for 30 days. If no
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-276A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-276A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-276A1.txt
  • MO&O, 22 FCC Rcd at 10483 � 47. Central Texas Telephone Cooperative v. FCC, 402 F.3d 205 (D.C. Cir. 2005); Air Transport Ass'n of America, Inc. v. FCC, 291 F.3d 49 (D.C. Cir. 2002); National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, Inc. v. Sullivan, 976 F.2d 227, 237 (D.C. Cir. 1992). Boston Petition at 13-18. Id., citing 47 C.F.R. � 1.935. 800 MHz Second MO&O, 22 FCC Rcd at 10484-85 �� 47-48. Id. at � 49. Boston Petition at 22-25; Washoe Petition at 3. Washoe County, Nevada, et al., WT Docket No. 02-55, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 11695, 11701 � 23 (2008) (Washoe County AFR Order). Petition for De Novo Review filed by Nextel Communications, Inc., filed July
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-36A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-36A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-36A1.txt
  • centralized trunked operations to file written notice with a frequency coordinator, which will notify the other frequency coordinators, none of whom may accept a conflicting application for sixty days. The Commission added this provision in 1999 in order to prevent ``strike'' applications against prospective applicants that have begun the process of seeking consent from existing stations. We note that Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules already prohibits the filing of mutually exclusive applications for the purpose of ``greenmail.'' We seek comment on this proposal. 470-512 MHz band offset channels. In 1997, the Commission directed the certified frequency coordinators for the private land mobile radio services to reach a consensus on the applicable coordination procedures for the 12.5 kHz offset channels in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-86A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-86A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-86A1.txt
  • (stating that ``[a]n auction is most likely to assign the license to the qualified licensee that most highly values it if the auction is open to all potentially qualified licensees'') (citing Implementation of Section 309(j) of the Communications Act - Competitive Bidding, PP Docket No. 93-253, Second Report and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 2348, 2360-2361 �� 70-71 (1994)). Although section 1.935 of our rules provides that any potential settlement payment that a renewal applicant may make to a competing applicant to withdraw its filing is limited to the filing party's reasonable and prudent expenses (see 47 C.F.R. � 1.935), we remain concerned that the potential for abuse of the Commission's processes nevertheless exists. Abuses of the comparative renewal process can be
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-86A1_Rcd.pdf
  • (2004) (stating that "[a]n auction is most likely to assign the license to the qualified licensee that most highly values it if the auction is open to all potentially qualified licensees") (citing Implementation of Section 309(j) of the Communications Act -Competitive Bidding, PP Docket No. 93-253, Second Report and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 2348, 2360-2361 �� 70-71 (1994)). 119Although section 1.935 of our rules provides that any potential settlementpayment that a renewal applicant may make to a competing applicant to withdrawits filing is limited to the filing party's reasonable and prudent expenses (see 47 C.F.R. �1.935), we remain concerned that the potential for abuse of the Commission's processes nevertheless exists. Abuses of the comparative renewal process can be difficult to prove.
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Notices/1998/fcc98025.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Notices/1998/fcc98025.txt http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Notices/1998/fcc98025.wp
  • Application forms; electronic and manual filing. 1.915.................General application requirements. 1.917 Who may sign applications. 1.919 Ownership information. 1.923 Content of applications. 1.925 Waivers. 1.926 Application processing; initial procedures. 1.927 Amendment of applications. 1.929 Classification of filings as major or minor. 1.931 Application for special temporary authority, temporary permit or temporary .......................operating authority. 1.933 Public notices. 1.934 Defective applications and dismissal. 1.935 Agreements to dismiss applications, amendments or pleadings. 1.937 Repetitious or conflicting applications. Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-25 C-5 1.939.................Petitions to deny. 1.945.................License grants. 1.946 Construction and coverage requirements. 1.947 Modification of licenses. 1.948 Assignment of authorization or transfer of control, notification of consummation. 1.949 Application for renewal of license. 1.951.................Duty to respond to official communications 1.955.................Termination of authorizations. 1.956 Settlement
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2004/DA-04-3027A1.html
  • FCC Rcd 17877 (WTB 1998) (``When the short-form filing deadline passes, the anti-collusion rule applies to all applicants with submitted short-form applications . . . We . . . remind applicants that submitted applications, once the short-form deadline passes, trigger application of the anti-collusion rule even if they are later withdrawn.''). 22 Response at 2-7. 23 Northeast's reliance on section 1.935 of the rules to support its claim that it ceased being an applicant for the purposes of the anti-collusion rule lacks merit. Response at 5-6. Section 1.935 relates to agreements among mutually exclusive applicants to dismiss their applications and clearly is inapplicable here. Northeast's further reliance on Public Notice, DA 02-659, 17 FCC Rcd 5,140 (WTB rel. March 19, 2002)
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2004/DOC-253529A1.html
  • as of August 28 and 29, WTB had not dismissed Northeast's application and it thus remained pending under the rules. When the Forfeiture Order is published in the FCC Record, it will contain the corrections referenced herein. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Davenport Chief, Investigations & Hearings Division Enforcement Bureau _________________________ 1 Response at 2-7. 2 Northeast's reliance on section 1.935 of the rules to support its claim that it ceased being an applicant for the purposes of the anti-collusion rule lacks merit. Response at 5-6. Section 1.935 relates to agreements among mutually exclusive applicants to dismiss their applications and clearly is inapplicable here. Northeast's further reliance on Public Notice, DA 02-659, 17 FCC Rcd 5,140 (WTB rel. March 19, 2002)
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/26/releases/pagebp_g.pdf
  • range for inclusion in the filing group. The types of filing groups used in day-to-day application processing are specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this section. A filing group is one of the following types: (1) Renewal filing group. A renewal filing group comprises a timely-filed application for renewal of an authorization and all timely-filed mutually exclusive competing applications (see � 1.935 of this chapter). (2) Same-day filing group. A same-day filing group comprises all mutually exclusive applications whose filing date is the same day, which is normally the filing date of the first-filed application(s). (3) Thirty-day notice and cut-off filing group. A 30-day notice and cut-off filing group comprises mutually exclusive applications whose filing date is no later than thirty (30)
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/general/releases/da020847.pdf http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/general/releases/da020847.txt
  • 22.227 Petitions to deny and limitations on settlements. (a) Procedures regarding petitions to deny long-form applications in the paging service will be governed by � 1.939. (b) The consideration that an individual or an entity will be permitted to receive for agreeing to withdraw an application or petition to deny will be limited by the provisions set forth in � 1.935. 25. Revise � 22.228 to read as follows: � 22.228 Cellular Rural Service Area licenses subject to competitive bidding. Mutually exclusive initial applications for Cellular Rural Service Area licenses are subject to competitive bidding. The general competitive bidding procedures set forth in Part 1, Subpart Q of this chapter will apply unless otherwise provided in this subpart. 26. Revise �
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/index.htm?job=headlines&y=2009
  • [584]pdf - [585]Word 5/14/2009 LETTER (DA 09-1071) Auction 73 Applications of Club 42 CM Limited Partnership (File Nos. 0003383865 and 0003383873); Renewal Application of Kankakee Cellular, LLC (File No. 0003637485) [586]pdf - [587]Word 5/13/2009 ORDER (DA 09-1056) Nevada Cogeneration Associates, Station WPMR751, Las Vegas, Nevada [588]pdf - [589]Word 5/13/2009 ORDER (DA 09-1061) Settlement Agreement and Request for Waiver for Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules, Banana Communications, LLC and the United States Department of Agriculture [590]pdf - [591]Word 5/12/2009 ORDER OF MODIFICATION (DA 09-1052) David E. Sanders [592]pdf - [593]Word 5/12/2009 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (DA 09-1054) IT& E Overseas, Inc., Transferor, and PTI Pacifica Inc., Transferee [594]pdf - [595]Word 5/8/2009 ORDER OF MODIFICATION (DA 09-1036) Falls Amateur Radio Club, Inc.
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/wtb/index.htm?job=headlines&y=2009
  • [584]pdf - [585]Word 5/14/2009 LETTER (DA 09-1071) Auction 73 Applications of Club 42 CM Limited Partnership (File Nos. 0003383865 and 0003383873); Renewal Application of Kankakee Cellular, LLC (File No. 0003637485) [586]pdf - [587]Word 5/13/2009 ORDER (DA 09-1056) Nevada Cogeneration Associates, Station WPMR751, Las Vegas, Nevada [588]pdf - [589]Word 5/13/2009 ORDER (DA 09-1061) Settlement Agreement and Request for Waiver for Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules, Banana Communications, LLC and the United States Department of Agriculture [590]pdf - [591]Word 5/12/2009 ORDER OF MODIFICATION (DA 09-1052) David E. Sanders [592]pdf - [593]Word 5/12/2009 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (DA 09-1054) IT& E Overseas, Inc., Transferor, and PTI Pacifica Inc., Transferee [594]pdf - [595]Word 5/8/2009 ORDER OF MODIFICATION (DA 09-1036) Falls Amateur Radio Club, Inc.
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/wtb/index.htm?job=releases_page&y=2007&m=2&t=Order
  • Station WNYM824, Seattle, Washington Modified the license for Private Land Mobile Radio Station WNYM824, Seattle, Washington DA-07-886A1: [49]pdf - [50]word - [51]txt 02/28/2007 WTB Orders (DA 07-898) Don Schellhardt on the behalf of Hams for Action Denied the petition for rulemaking DA-07-898A1: [52]pdf - [53]word - [54]txt 02/28/2007 WTB Orders (DA 07-899) Settlement Agreement and Request for Waiver Of Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules, WWC License LLC, et al Granted the Joint Request and Approved the Settlement Agreement DA-07-899A1: [55]pdf - [56]word - [57]txt 02/28/2007 WTB Orders (DA 07-915) Tracy Corporation II, Request for Waiver of Installment Payment Rules for Auction No. 11 and Reinstatement of License Granted Tracy a nunc pro tunc waiver of the automatic cancellation provision of
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/wtb/index.htm?job=releases_page&y=2009&m=5&t=Order
  • and Kankakee Cellular, LLC to file respo... DA-09-1071A1_Rcd: [81]pdf DA-09-1071A1: [82]pdf - [83]word - [84]txt 05/13/2009 WTB Orders (DA 09-1056) NEVADA COGENERATION ASSOCIATES, STATION WPMR751, LAS VEGAS, NEVADA Granted the Request for Enforcement Action filed by Nevada Cogeneration Associates DA-09-1056A1_Rcd: [85]pdf DA-09-1056A1: [86]pdf - [87]word - [88]txt 05/13/2009 WTB Orders (DA 09-1061) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF SECTION 1.935 OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES, BANANA COMMUNICATIONS, LLC AND THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Consented to Assignment of PCS Licenses KNLH651 and KNLH653 From Northstar Technology, LLC to Banana... DA-09-1061A1_Rcd: [89]pdf DA-09-1061A1: [90]pdf - [91]word - [92]txt 05/13/2009 WTB Orders (DA 09-1066) Erratum - Amendment of Part 90 of the Commission's Rules Issued an Erratum correcting a Report and Order
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Intl/4361-98.pdf
  • 1.227.413.8 2.9 $1,655,75242.7 0.041.911.9 3.4 $2,946,30691.4 0.0 6.6 0.0 2.0 23,814,54452.5 1.528.913.0 4.0 Gabon $3,837,08355.9 2.221.5 4.915.6 $355,04656.9 0.042.8 0.0 0.3 $993,24627.1 0.072.9 0.0 0.0 4,227,14039.7 3.327.8 5.323.9 Gambia, The $5,833,14749.0 2.331.0 8.9 8.9 $550,66053.4 0.018.415.912.2 $586,53493.4 0.0 6.4 0.0 0.2 8,800,53833.2 3.441.0 8.214.2 Ghana $33,198,99459.2 4.416.8 5.713.9 $3,929,11836.7 0.038.216.1 8.9 $360,57533.9 0.066.1 0.0 0.0 52,594,69641.1 7.720.3 6.524.4 Guinea $5,877,83348.6 1.935.3 7.6 6.7 $1,662,82239.0 0.061.0 0.0 0.0 $3,674,39368.3 0.031.7 0.0 0.0 9,754,63030.6 2.653.8 5.2 7.9 Guinea-Bissau $1,434,71938.9 6.6 0.1 0.054.4 $717 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.097.1 $353,61699.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.4 1,880,99115.8 6.1 0.0 0.078.0 - Switched Service Market Shares 1 - 1998 Annual data SECTION 43.61 International Traffic Data for ALL U.S. POINTS: All Settlement Arrangements TABLE E: Market Shares MESSAGE
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Intl/4361-f02.pdf
  • 1.620.8 8.8 Venezuela $42,846,03039.724.5 1.928.1 5.8 $1,236,29812.927.7 0.049.510.0 $316,08050.521.4 7.520.7 0.0 166,857,23226.229.5 3.732.2 8.4 South America $578,155,39955.814.8 1.323.4 4.8 $59,298,83940.919.0 0.038.9 1.1 $9,880,23323.512.9 7.310.945.4 2,940,938,09532.518.2 2.836.8 9.8 Afghanistan $3,201,164 0.0 4.2 0.486.9 8.4 $219,870 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 0.0 $2,623 0.0 7.959.332.8 0.0 12,495,273 0.0 2.0 0.387.110.6 Bangladesh $23,422,91832.826.1 0.728.611.7 $207,86764.010.8 0.025.0 0.2 $967,03179.813.0 5.2 2.1 0.0 117,404,77411.929.5 1.044.213.3 Bhutan $56,605 1.935.0 0.631.231.2 $1 0.0 0.0100.0 0.0 0.0 $16993.5 0.0 6.5 0.0 0.0 286,844 0.345.3 0.740.813.0 Brunei $1,512,64649.4 5.9 0.144.1 0.5 $38,23923.6 2.4 0.073.6 0.4 $89,02692.6 1.4 6.0 0.0 0.0 4,451,44059.913.5 0.524.5 1.6 Burma $3,758,11814.126.6 0.641.617.0 $0 $20,279 0.3 2.897.0 0.0 0.0 19,136,669 1.016.2 0.472.6 9.8 Cambodia $6,457,037 1.880.6 0.6 4.912.0 $935,05016.4 3.3 0.080.1 0.2 $13,96532.731.735.6 0.0 0.0 9,991,433 5.048.6 1.223.821.5 Chagos
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Intl/4361-f99.pdf
  • 0.0 0.0 0.0 34,019,35436.8 9.5 5.4 3.245.1 Slovenia $5,656,60568.613.9 2.6 5.2 9.7 $808,54467.324.0 0.0 0.0 8.7 $110,12143.057.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11,769,83352.810.7 3.216.117.1 Tajikistan $285,548 0.179.912.0 0.1 7.9 $0 $0 305,509 0.148.626.6 1.523.2 Turkmenistan $375,492 0.265.214.1 7.213.3 $165,120 0.099.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 $8,600 0.0100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 643,517 0.161.810.210.217.7 Ukraine $46,351,52630.241.6 9.7 0.717.8 $1,636,37949.522.6 8.4 0.019.5 $869,69583.214.7 2.1 0.0 0.0 78,706,56826.618.118.1 1.935.3 Uzbekistan $7,586,12828.364.4 0.7 2.4 4.2 $1,207,15534.165.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 $632,46491.5 8.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 10,507,36523.463.8 0.5 4.7 7.6 - Switched Services Market Shares Page 5 - 1999 Annual data SECTION 43.61 International Traffic Data for ALL U.S. POINTS: All Settlement Arrangements TABLE E: Market Shares MESSAGE TELEPHONE SERVICE Billing Types Covered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 11, 12, 14, 15,
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/98SOCC.PDF
  • 0.122 DC FLORIDA 384.1 132.2 251.9 179.3 154.7 102.4 23.2 27.1 152.7 1.999 FL GEORGIA 12.3 182.0 (169.6) (217.0) 59.9 38.7 10.3 9.7 58.7 1.238 GA HAWAII 63.5 45.5 18.0 13.8 49.2 26.3 13.4 8.9 48.5 0.667 HI IDAHO 347.6 324.4 23.2 19.1 10.1 5.7 2.3 2.1 10.1 0.043 ID ILLINOIS 393.9 102.3 291.6 248.1 141.0 79.1 39.5 20.5 139.1 1.935 IL INDIANA 140.5 67.6 72.9 52.2 45.7 27.9 10.0 7.3 45.1 0.617 IN IOWA 194.3 172.7 21.6 12.9 10.7 5.7 2.5 2.4 10.6 0.080 IA KANSAS 113.8 60.9 52.8 48.9 (3.5) (1.8) (0.6) (1.1) (3.4) (0.020)KS KENTUCKY (38.5) 10.3 (48.8) (59.5) 30.1 20.0 5.1 4.7 29.8 0.302 KY LOUISIANA 302.2 2.1 300.1 290.5 14.4 10.3 2.2 1.6 14.2 0.223 LA
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Notices/1998/fcc98025.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Notices/1998/fcc98025.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Notices/1998/fcc98025.wp
  • Application forms; electronic and manual filing. 1.915.................General application requirements. 1.917 Who may sign applications. 1.919 Ownership information. 1.923 Content of applications. 1.925 Waivers. 1.926 Application processing; initial procedures. 1.927 Amendment of applications. 1.929 Classification of filings as major or minor. 1.931 Application for special temporary authority, temporary permit or temporary .......................operating authority. 1.933 Public notices. 1.934 Defective applications and dismissal. 1.935 Agreements to dismiss applications, amendments or pleadings. 1.937 Repetitious or conflicting applications. Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-25 C-5 1.939.................Petitions to deny. 1.945.................License grants. 1.946 Construction and coverage requirements. 1.947 Modification of licenses. 1.948 Assignment of authorization or transfer of control, notification of consummation. 1.949 Application for renewal of license. 1.951.................Duty to respond to official communications 1.955.................Termination of authorizations. 1.956 Settlement
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Orders/1999/da992740.doc
  • not yet on public notice, or for which the 60-day cut-off period for filing competing applications had not been completed prior to November 13, 1995. Subsequently, on July 29, 1999, the Commission affirmed its licensing approach, and amended its processing policy by deciding to process all 39 GHz applications that satisfied the thirty-day public notice requirement. III. DISCUSSION 3. Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules permits parties that have filed applications that are mutually exclusive with one or more applications to enter into an agreement to resolve the mutual exclusivity. Upon approval of the agreement by the Commission, the parties may complete the agreement. Our review of the applications shows that the mutual exclusivity among the applications was not resolved. As
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Orders/2000/da000115.doc
  • 47 C.F.R. � 22.29 (1988). We decline to apply the rule against ``greenmail,'' 47 C.F.R. � 22.129, which was intended to deter speculative filings, as there is nothing in the history of this proceeding to indicate that the application for initial cellular service authorization was filed as part of a speculative venture. Section 22.129 was renumbered as current rule section 1.935 in the Commission's adoption of the Universal Licensing System rules. See In the Matter of Biennial Regulatory Review - Amendment of Parts 0, 1, 13, 22, 24, 26, 27, 80, 87, 90, 95, 97, and 101 of the Commission's Rules To Facilitate the Development and Use of the Universal Licensing System in the Wireless Telecommunications Services, Report and Order, 13
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Orders/2000/da000344.doc
  • of extracting a settlement payment from Zephyr. See In Re Applications of Algreg Cellular Engineering, Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 99-281 (rel. October 18, 1999). See, ``Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Extends Waiver of Limitations on Payments in Settlement Agreements Among Parties in Contested Licensing Cases,'' Public Notice, DA 99-1734 (rel. August 30, 1999). Section 22.129 was renumbered as current rule section 1.935 in the Commission's adoption of the Universal Licensing System rules. See In the Matter of Biennial Regulatory Review - Amendment of Parts 0, 1, 13, 22, 24, 26, 27, 80, 87, 90, 95, 97, and 101 of the Commission's Rules To Facilitate the Development and Use of the Universal Licensing System in the Wireless Telecommunications Services, Report and Order, 13
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Orders/2000/da000828.doc
  • 154(i), and sections 0.331 and 1.939(g) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331, 1.939(g), the petition to deny filed by PA4 on July 15, 1999 IS DISMISSED as MOOT. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Paul D'Ari Chief, Policy and Rules Branch Commercial Wireless Division Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Public Notice, DA 99-745 (Apr. 16, 1999) (Greenmail Waiver Notice). See 47 C.F.R. �� 1.935(a), (b). The waiver initially was in effect for a 90-day period that expired on August 16, 1999, but the Commission subsequently extended it until October 30, 1999. See Public Notice, DA 99-1734 (Aug. 30, 1999). Greenmail Waiver Notice at 1. Letter from David C. Jatlow, Counsel for Binghamton (Jatlow), to Steven Weingarten, Chief, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (CWD
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Orders/2000/da001532.doc
  • Order, 88 FCC 2d 1492 (1982) (settlements in comparative renewal proceedings would be considered on a case-by-case basis)). DCT Petition for Reconsideration at 8. Id. at 9. Settlement Agreement Among 38.6-40.0 GHz Applicants at 1 (emphasis added). Id. at 2 (emphasis added). DCT Petition for Reconsideration at 14. Id. The current rule that governs agreements to amend application is Section 1.935 of the Commission's Rules. 47 C.F.R. � 1.935 (1999). 47 C.F.R. � 21.29(b)(1) (1994). 47 C.F.R. � 21.29(e) (1994). DCT Petition for Reconsideration at 10. See Report and Order and Second NPRM, 12 FCC Rcd at 18641-45 �� 88-97; July 29 MO&O, 14 FCC Rcd at 12449 �� 35-36. DCT Petition for Reconsideration at 10. See July 29 MO&O, 14
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Orders/2000/er000828.doc
  • 154(i), and sections 0.331 and 1.939(g) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.331, 1.939(g), the petition to deny filed by PA4 on July 15, 1999 IS DISMISSED as MOOT. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Paul D'Ari Chief, Policy and Rules Branch Commercial Wireless Division Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Public Notice, DA 99-745 (Apr. 16, 1999) (Greenmail Waiver Notice). See 47 C.F.R. �� 1.935(a), (b). The waiver initially was in effect for a 90-day period that expired on August 16, 1999, but the Commission subsequently extended it until October 30, 1999. See Public Notice, DA 99-1734 (Aug. 30, 1999). Greenmail Waiver Notice at 1. Letter from David C. Jatlow, Counsel for Binghamton (Jatlow), to Steven Weingarten, Chief, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (CWD
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Public_Notices/1999/da992827.doc
  • its Petitions to Deny and an Application for Review of the Bureau's granting of Cook Inlet's and OPCS Three's long form applications. On December 14, 1999, National Telecom requested withdrawal or dismissal of its Petitions to Deny and Applications for Review (Petition for Withdrawal). The Branch has reviewed the record and finds that the parties' settlement request complies with section 1.935 of the Commission's rules. Accordingly, the Branch approves National Telecom's Petition for Withdrawal of the following pleadings: Petition to Deny the long form application of Cook Inlet, filed June 3, 1999 (file no. 0000012949). Petition to Deny the long form application of OPCS Three, filed June 3, 1999 (file no. 0000012978). Application for Review of the denial of National Telecom's
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Public_Notices/2000/da000199.doc
  • their applications for review and petition for reconsideration. The Division hereby cancels the 5 SMR licenses listed below and awards finder's preferences to the respective finders in each case listed. The Division has further reviewed the proposed settlements and hereby approves the withdrawal of the applications for review and the petition for reconsideration in accordance with sections 0.331, 1.106, 1.115, 1.935, and 90.173(k)(1994) of the Commission's rules1 and the Bureau's Public Notice waiving limitations on settlement agreements among parties in contested licensing cases.2 Petitioner Target Licensee Case No. / Call Sign Action Leflore Com Inc. Doris Shaw 96F120 / WPFA415 Application For Review Withdrawn Leflore Com Inc. Barbara Taylor 96F121 / WPEP579 Application For Review Withdrawn Comm Assoc. Samuel Z. Silver
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Public_Notices/2000/da001685.doc
  • After consummation of the contemplated transactions, the parties intend that Rinker will be licensed to operate the 152.03 Facility, SMFI will be licensed to operate the 152.18 Facility, and Verizon Wireless will be licensed for the remaining facilities currently licensed to Station KCC485. Having reviewed the Settlement and the Withdrawal Request, we find that the parties' requests comply with section 1.935 of the Commission's rules. Therefore, pursuant to sections 4(i) and 310(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i), 310(d), and section 0.331 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 0.331, the Bureau approves (1) application File No. 0000135296, requesting consent to partial assignment of Call Sign KCC485, currently controlled by Verizon Wireless Messaging Services, LLC
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Public_Notices/2000/da002026.doc
  • around Florida. By letter dated August 23, 2000, Priority requested the withdrawal of its Application for Review, noting that ``its business plans have changed as a result of the FCC's transition from site-by-site to geographic licensing of 931 MHz paging facilities, which have rendered [Priority's] concerns moot.'' As part of its request, Priority provided a certification in accordance with section 1.935(a) of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. �1.935(a). The Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed and hereby approves Priority's request to withdraw its Application for Review filed September 27, 1999. Action by the Chief, Policy and Rules Branch, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. For further information, contact Evan C. Baranoff at (202) 418-7142, Wireless Telecommunications
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Public_Notices/2000/da002027.doc
  • each dated August 23, 2000, Priority requested the withdrawal of each of its three Petitions for Reconsideration, noting that ``its business plans have changed as a result of the FCC's transition from site-by-site to geographic licensing of 931 MHz paging facilities, which have rendered [Priority's] concerns moot.'' As part of each request, Priority provided a certification in accordance with section 1.935(a) of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. �1.935(a). The Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed and hereby approves Priority's requests to withdraw its three Petitions for Reconsideration. Action by the Chief, Policy and Rules Branch, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. For further information, contact Evan C. Baranoff at (202) 418-7142, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Commercial Wireless
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Public_Notices/2000/da002126.doc
  • Mobile Relays and Performance Mobile have now settled Finder's Preference Case No. 95F749 and request cancellation of Performance Mobile's license for Station WPCR378 and the award of a finder's preference for this station to Mobile Relays. The parties also seek approval of Mobile Relay's request to withdraw its Application for Review. The parties have filed certifications in accordance with Section 1.935(a)(1) of the Commission's rules. The Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed the proposed settlement and hereby approves the settlement in accordance with sections 0.331, 1.115, and 1.935 of the Commission's rules. Accordingly, we cancel Performance Mobile's license for Station WPCR378 and grant the license for that station to Mobile Relays pursuant to a finder's preference.
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Public_Notices/2000/da002447.doc
  • No. 22406-CD-P/ML-95. By letter dated October 23, 2000, Priority requested the withdrawal of its Application for Review, noting that ``its business plans have changed as a result of the FCC's transition from site-by-site to geographic licensing of 931 MHz paging facilities, which have rendered [Priority's] concerns moot.'' As part of its request, Priority provided a certification in accordance with section 1.935(a) of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. �1.935(a). The Policy and Rules Branch of the Commercial Wireless Division has reviewed and hereby approves Priority's request to withdraw its Application for Review filed September 27, 1999. Action by the Deputy Chief, Policy and Rules Branch, Commercial Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. For further information, contact Evan C. Baranoff at (202) 418-7142, Wireless
• http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Digest/2007/dd070228.html
  • for renewal. by NALF. Action by: Chief, Media Bureau. Adopted: 01/31/2007 by MO&O. (DA No. 07-887). MB [141]DA-07-887A1.doc [142]DA-07-887A1.pdf [143]DA-07-887A1.txt DON SCHELLHARDT ON THE BEHALF OF HAMS FOR ACTION. Denied the petition for rulemaking. Action by: Deputy Chief, Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau by LETTER. (DA No. 07-898). WTB [144]DA-07-898A1.doc [145]DA-07-898A1.pdf [146]DA-07-898A1.txt SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF SECTION 1.935 OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES, WWC LICENSE LLC, ET AL. Granted the Joint Request and Approved the Settlement Agreement. Action by: Assistant Chief, Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. Adopted: 02/28/2007 by ORDER. (DA No. 07-899). WTB [147]DA-07-899A1.doc [148]DA-07-899A1.pdf [149]DA-07-899A1.txt WASHINGTON ALARM, INC., LICENSEE OF INDUSTRIAL/BUSINESS PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO STATION WNYM824, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON. Modified the license for Private Land Mobile Radio
• http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Digest/2009/dd090513.html
  • Bureau. Adopted: 05/12/2009 by Forfeiture Order. (DA No. 09-1059). MB [78]DA-09-1059A1.doc [79]DA-09-1059A1.pdf [80]DA-09-1059A1.txt NEVADA COGENERATION ASSOCIATES, STATION WPMR751, LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. Granted the Request for Enforcement Action filed by Nevada Cogeneration Associates. Action by: Deputy Chief, Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. Adopted: 05/12/2009 by ORDER. (DA No. 09-1056). WTB [81]DA-09-1056A1.doc [82]DA-09-1056A1.pdf [83]DA-09-1056A1.txt SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF SECTION 1.935 OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES, BANANA COMMUNICATIONS, LLC AND THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. Consented to Assignment of PCS Licenses KNLH651 and KNLH653 From Northstar Technology, LLC to Banana Communications, LLC. Action by: Deputy Chief, Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. Adopted: 05/13/2009 by ORDER. (DA No. 09-1061). WTB [84]DA-09-1061A1.doc [85]DA-09-1061A1.pdf [86]DA-09-1061A1.txt * * * * * ADDENDA: THE FOLLOWING ITEMS,
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2004/DA-04-3027A1.html
  • FCC Rcd 17877 (WTB 1998) (``When the short-form filing deadline passes, the anti-collusion rule applies to all applicants with submitted short-form applications . . . We . . . remind applicants that submitted applications, once the short-form deadline passes, trigger application of the anti-collusion rule even if they are later withdrawn.''). 22 Response at 2-7. 23 Northeast's reliance on section 1.935 of the rules to support its claim that it ceased being an applicant for the purposes of the anti-collusion rule lacks merit. Response at 5-6. Section 1.935 relates to agreements among mutually exclusive applicants to dismiss their applications and clearly is inapplicable here. Northeast's further reliance on Public Notice, DA 02-659, 17 FCC Rcd 5,140 (WTB rel. March 19, 2002)
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2004/DOC-253529A1.html
  • as of August 28 and 29, WTB had not dismissed Northeast's application and it thus remained pending under the rules. When the Forfeiture Order is published in the FCC Record, it will contain the corrections referenced herein. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Davenport Chief, Investigations & Hearings Division Enforcement Bureau _________________________ 1 Response at 2-7. 2 Northeast's reliance on section 1.935 of the rules to support its claim that it ceased being an applicant for the purposes of the anti-collusion rule lacks merit. Response at 5-6. Section 1.935 relates to agreements among mutually exclusive applicants to dismiss their applications and clearly is inapplicable here. Northeast's further reliance on Public Notice, DA 02-659, 17 FCC Rcd 5,140 (WTB rel. March 19, 2002)