| Date Filed | Summary | Pages |
| 06/18/1998 | Second entry on rehearing that the contract filing policy first adopted in the April 30, 1998 entry on rehearing is clarified in accordance with this entry; that the OTIA's motion for leave to file an application for rehearing instanter and its application for rehearing, Ameritech Ohio's application for rehearing, and AT&T's memorandum contra Ameritech Ohio's application for rehearing are moot; that this case be closed of record. (7 pgs.) | 7 |
| 06/11/1998 | AT&T's motion for leave to intervene and memorandum in support, and file its memorandum contra to Amiertech's application for rehearing instanter, filed by B. Kahn. (5 pgs.) | 5 |
| 06/11/1998 | AT&T's memorandum contra to Ameritech Ohio's application for rehearing, filed by B. Kahn. (5 pgs.) | 5 |
| 06/01/1998 | Application for rehearing filed on behalf of Ameritech Ohio by J. Lang. (7 pgs.) | 7 |
| 05/29/1998 | Application for Rehearing of the Ohio Telecommunications Industry Association. submitted by: T. Lodge. (7 pgs.) | 7 |
| 05/29/1998 | Motion & Memorandum in support of the Ohio Telecommunication Industry Assoc. for leave to file Application for Rehearing Instanter. Submitted by: T. Lodge. (4 pgs.) | 4 |
| 04/30/1998 | Entry granting Ameritech's application for rehearing; that the Docketing Division continue to treat the information filed under seal as protected material until December 31, 2002, unless otherwise ordered by the Commission. (9 pgs.) | 9 |
| 04/09/1998 | Entry ordering that rehearing is granted for the limited purpose of affording the Commission additional time to consider the arguments raised on rehearing. (5 pgs.) | 5 |
| 03/26/1998 | Joint memorandum contra Ameritech Ohio's application for rehearing, filed on behalf of Time Warner Communications by M. Schermer and Nextlink Ohio by D. Clayton. (7 pgs.) | 7 |
| 03/16/1998 | Application for rehearing and memorandum in support filed on behalf of applicant by J. Lang. (30 pgs.) | 30 |
| 02/12/1998 | Entry ordering that Ameritech's request for protective treatment of the redacted information is denied; that the Docketing Division is directed to release into the public record all documents filed under seal in these cases pur- suant to the directions given in Finding 12; that Ameri- tech's motions seeking to extend protective treatment to the contracts set forth in Finding 10 are denied; that the Commission's rulings in this entry do not affect the sus- pension of the contracts set forth in Finding 13. (10 pgs.) | 10 |
| 08/09/1996 | Memo automatically approving the application as of 8/8/96; case shall remain open pending decision on protective order. (1 pg.) | 1 |
| 07/09/1996 | Un-redacted version of the contract filed on behalf of applicant by J. Matz. (4 pgs.) (FILED UNDER SEAL) | 4 |
| 07/09/1996 | Motion for protective order and memorandum in support filed on behalf of applicant by J. Kelly. (6 pgs.) | 6 |
| 07/09/1996 | In the matter of the redacted version of a renewal of a contract for Ameritech Centrex Service between Ameritech Ohio and The Citizens Banking Company. (3 pgs.) | 3 |