Skip to main content
Date
Rule
PNO Manual - Letter 296
Staff
M. Verne
Response/Comments
Agree. B. Michael Verne 8/28/01

Question

August 27, 2001

B. Michael Verne

Premerger Notification Office

Bureau of Competition

Federal Trade Commission

Room 303

600 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20580

Re: Change of Ultimate Parent Entity of Acquiring Person

Dear Mike:

I am writing to confirm our telephone conversation of earlier today in which you advised me that an ultimate parent entity ("UPE ") that previously was an entity within another UPE is not required to file for a transaction that would have been covered by a filing made by its previous UPE.

The following hypothetical is illustrative. Company A was a subsidiary of Company B until it was spun off and became its own UPE. Company A wishes to acquire voting securities of Target valued at $75 million. Before Company A was spun off from Company B, Company B filed for an acquisition of voting securities of Target at the $50 million threshold. The waiting period has expired or been terminated.

You explained the PNO's position to be that a new filing is not required where the new UPE was within the filing UPE at the time of the filing. Accordingly, Company As proposed acquisition of Target voting securities is covered by Company B's original filing provided that the notification has not expired.

Please call me if I have misstated the PNO's position on this issue.

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.