Comment Sought on Domestic 214 Acquisition of Assets of RNK Inc.
Federal Communications Commission
News Media Information 202 / 418-0500445 12th St., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20554
Released: November 26, 2012
DOMESTIC SECTION 214 APPLICATION FILED FOR THE
ACQUISITION OF ASSETS OF RNK, INC. BY SIGNAL POINT CORP.
STREAMLINED PLEADING CYCLE ESTABLISHED
WC Docket No. 12-312
Comments Due: December 10, 2012
Reply Comments Due: December 17, 2012
Applicants) filed an application pursuant to section 63.03 of the Commission’s rules1 requesting approval
for the transfer of RNK’s assets to Signal Point. Applicants consummated this transaction without
authority on September 28, 2012.2
RNK, a Massachusetts corporation, is authorized to provide competitive local exchange (LEC)
and interexchange services in Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and
Virginia. RNK is a wholly owned subsidiary of Wave2Wave Communications, Inc. (Wave2Wave), a
Delaware corporation.3 RNK is also the parent of RNK VA, LLC, a Virginia limited liability company
with authority to provide competitive LEC services in Virginia.
1 47 C.F.R § 63.03; see 47 U.S.C. § 214. Applicants also filed an application for a transfer of control associated
with authorization for international services. Any action on this domestic section 214 application is without
prejudice to Commission action on other related, pending applications. Applicants filed supplements to their
domestic section 214 application on November 9 and 26, 2012.
2 Signal Point filed a request for special temporary authority (STA) to allow it to continue to provide service to
customers while the domestic section 214 application is pending. On November 2, 2012, the Wireline Competition
Bureau granted the STA for the domestic authorization for a period of 60 days. RNK, Inc. and Signal Point Corp.
d/b/a Signal Point Communications, Application for Consent to Transfer Control of Assets Pursuant to Section 214
of the Communications Act, as Amended, WC Docket No. 12-312, Request for Special Temporary Authority (filed
Oct. 31, 2012). A grant of the application will be without prejudice to any enforcement action by the Commission
for non-compliance with the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, or the Commission’s rules.
3 Applicants state that, on February 17, 2012, RNK and Wave2Wave filed voluntary petitions for relief under
Chapter 11, Title 11 of the United States Code. They state that, on September 27, 2012, the Court approved the sale
of RNK’s telecommunications assets and licenses to Signal Point. Wave2Wave Communications, Inc., et al., Case
No. 12-13896 (DHS) (Bankr. D. N.J.-Newark Vicinage) (2012).
Signal Point is a New York corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of Signal Point Holding
Corp., a Delaware corporation. Robert DePalo, a U. S. citizen, owns 93.7 percent of Signal Point Holding
Corp. Applicants state that Signal Point Holding Corp. owns 100 percent of Signal Point
Telecommunications that provides Voice of Internet Protocol services in New York, Connecticut, New
Jersey, and Illinois. They further state that Mr. DePalo does not have any other telecommunications
Pursuant to the terms of the proposed transaction, Signal Point purchased substantially all of the
assets, including customer contracts, of RNK and RNK VA, LLC, and RNK and RNK VA, LLC will be
dissolved. Applicants state that the proposed transaction is entitled to presumptive streamlined treatment
under section 63.03(b)(2)(i) of the Commission’s rules4 and that a grant of the application will serve the
public interest, convenience, and necessity.
Domestic Section 214 Application filed for the Acquisition of Assets of RNK, Inc. by
Signal Point Corp., WC Docket No. 12-312 (filed Oct. 19, 2012).
GENERAL INFORMATIONThe transfer of control identified herein has been found, upon initial review, to be acceptable for
filing as a streamlined application. The Commission reserves the right to return any transfer application
if, upon further examination, it is determined to be defective and not in conformance with the
Commission’s rules and policies. Pursuant to section 63.03(a) of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR §
63.03(a), interested parties may file comments on or before December 10, 2012, and reply comments on
or before December 17, 2012. Pursuant to section 63.52 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. § 63.52,
commenters must serve a copy of comments on the Applicants no later than the above comment filing
date. Unless otherwise notified by the Commission, the Applicants may transfer control on the 31st day
after the date of this notice.5
Pursuant to section 63.03 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR § 63.03, parties to this proceeding
should file any documents in this proceeding using the Commission’s Electronic Comment Filing System
In addition, e-mail one copy of each pleading to each of the following:
1) Jodie May, Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, email@example.com;
2) Myrva Charles, Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau,
3) David Krech, Policy Division, International Bureau, firstname.lastname@example.org; and
4) Jim Bird, Office of General Counsel, email@example.com.
People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities
(braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org or call the
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (tty).
4 47 C.F.R. § 63.03(b)(2)(i).
5 Such authorization is conditioned upon receipt of any other necessary approvals from the Commission in
connection with the proposed transaction.
The proceeding in this Notice shall be treated as a “permit-but-disclose” proceeding in
accordance with the Commission’s ex parte rules.6 Persons making ex parte presentations must file a
copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two
business days after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies).
Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation
must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte
presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during the
presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments
already reflected in the presenter’s written comments, memoranda or other filings in the proceeding, the
presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or
other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be
found) in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission
staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must be filed
consistent with rule 1.1206(b), 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206(b). Participants in this proceeding should familiarize
themselves with the Commission’s ex parte rules.
For further information, please contact Jodie May at (202) 418-0913 or Myrva Charles at (202)
6 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1200 et seq.
Note: We are currently transitioning our documents into web compatible formats for easier reading. We have done our best to supply this content to you in a presentable form, but there may be some formatting issues while we improve the technology. The original version of the document is available as a PDF, Word Document, or as plain text.