Skip to main content
Date
Staff
John M. Sipple, Jr., Esq.
Response/Comments
None noted

Question

(redacted)

October 22, 1987

BY HAND

Premerger Notification Office
Bureau of Competition
Federal Trade Commission
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Room 303
Washington, D.C. 20580

Re:

Dear Mr. Sipple:

This supplements my letter to Jeffrey Zuckerman, dated October 5, 1987. (Redacted). We suspect that these additional purchases, like the earlier ones described in my October 5 letter, were made through (redacted).

In light of the accelerated accumulation of (redacted) stock in continuing violation of the HSR Act, we reiterate our request that the Commission commence an immediate investigation into the methods and devices which have been employed by (redacted) to acquire their holdings of (redacted) securities. Such an investigation cannot wait until (redacted) while a Schedule 13D. As the article reports, it is a common tactic for (redacted) acquire a stake just under 5% so as to avoid having to disclose his holdings, intentions, or methods in a Schedule 13D. Moreover, delaying the enforcement of the HSR Act until disclosures are required under the securities laws is irreconcilable the Commissions new definition of control under Section 801.1(b)(1)(ii) of the Premerger Rules. See pp. 3-4 of our previous letter. It is just such a delay which will enable (redacted) to carry out their plan to put (redacted) in play through violations of the HSR Act.

Sincerely,

(Redacted)

cc: (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.