8411001 Informal Interpretation

Date:
Rule:
803.2
Staff:
Andrew Scanlon
Response/Comments:

11/6/84 Called [indecipherable] - He is not available. told his secy that we do notrespond by mail but that I agree with the statements in this letter & confirm his understanding AMS 11/6/84

Question

(redacted)

November 1, 1984

Mr. Andy Scanlon
Federal Trade Commission
Pennsylvania Avenue at
Sixth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20580

              Re:Hart-Scott-Rodino Premerger Notification

Dear Mr. Scanlon:

The purpose of this letter is to request documentation for our files of your representations made in our telephone conversation regarding completion of the Premerger Notification.

ITEM 5 - Based upon our discussion, you have indicated that when the person filing notification, in this case a general partnership (A), has an investment in another partnership (B), that the revenues of (B) would not be reported in item 5.

ITEM 6a - In accordance with the above representation, you have also indicated that partnership (B) would not be deemed as an entity within the person filing notification.

If you are in agreement with the above statements, we would appreciate your response by return mail. If you have any questions, please contact me.

Sincerely

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

About Informal Interpretations

Informal interpretations provide guidance from previous staff interpretations on the applicability of the HSR rules to specific fact situations. You should not rely on them as a substitute for reading the Act and the Rules themselves. These materials do not, and are not intended to, constitute legal advice.

Learn more about Informal Interpretations.