Attachment response

response

RESPONSE TO REPLY COMMENTS submitted by "AvL"

AvL response to comment (letter) of SWE-DISH file on October 15, 2004.

2004-10-22

This document pretains to SES-MOD-20040225-00277 for Modification on a Satellite Earth Station filing.

IBFS_SESMOD2004022500277_402187

CoupERtT BROTHERS LLP NORTH AMERICA LOS ANGELES. NEW YORK, PALO ALTO, SAN FRANCISCO, WASHINGTON ATTORNEYS AT LAW EUROPE ANTWERP, BERLIN, BRUSSELS, FRANKFURT, 1627 | STREET, N.W. GHENT, LONDON, MILAN, MOSCOW, MUNICH, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006—4007 PARIS, ROME, ST. PETERSBURG, STOCKHOLM TEL: (202) 775—5100 ASIA/PACIFIC FAX: (202) 775—1168 ALMATY, BANGKOK, BEIJING, HONG KONG, JAKARTA, SINGAPORE, SYDNEY, TOKYO WWwW.COUDERT.COM ASSOCIATED OFFICES BUDAPEST, MEXICO CIY, PRAGUE, SHANGHA October 22, 2004 Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary Federal Communications Commission Office of the Secretary c/o Natek, Inc. 236 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E. Suite 110 Washington, DC 20002 Re: AvL Technologies, Inc. Earth Station Application Amendment, FCC File No. SES—AMD—20040903—01302 Dear Ms. Dortch: AvL—Technologies, Inc. ("AvL") herein responds to the comments ("Letter") of SWE— DISH Satellite Communications, Inc. ("SWE—DISH"), dated October 15, 2004, with respect to the above—referenced AvL earth station application amendment ("Amendment").‘ We note that SWE—DISH specifically does not raise any "objections to the amendment per se"; specifically recognizes that the amendment is "minor" and that "nothing significant" has been changed by the amendment; and specifically raises no new matters "not included" in the AvL Amendment and not previously "addressed" by SWE—DISH (Letter, paragraphs 1 and 2). ‘ We note, from the Letter—head, that SWE—DISH has retained new counsel, which could explain the lack of actual receipt of past service. We also note that the new SWE—DISH counsel was personally aware of the amendment at the time it was filed; and that, as SWE—DISH counsel itself recognizes, the Amendment was placed on Public Notice despite only "minor" "non—substantive" and "procedural" (1.1202) clarifications not requiring such treatment.


Document Created: 2004-10-25 14:17:51
Document Modified: 2004-10-25 14:17:51
© 2024 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC