Skip to main content
Date
Rule
802.30; 7A(c)(10); 7A(c)(3)
Staff
Richard Smith, Staff Attorney
Response/Comments
See below

Question

February 28, 1994

Richard Smith, Staff Attorney
Federal Trade Commission
Pre-Merger Notification Office, Room 303
Washington, D.C. 20580

Dear Mr. Smith:

This letter is to confirm our telephone conversation of Thursday, February 24, 1994, regarding my letter to you dated January 31, 1994 and follow-up letter dated February 21, 1994, requesting an informal opinion regarding the existence of exemptions from the pre-merger notification requirements of the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976.

See Files #9401012 and 9402008

During that telephone conversation, you indicated your concurrence with our opinion that exemptions from the pre-merger notification requirements exist for both Corporations A and B. Specifically, with regard to Corporation A, you concurred that the exemption set forth in 16 CFR 802.30 is applicable. with regard to Corporation B, you indicated that if an exemption was necessary, 15 USCA 18a(c)(10) is applicable since Corporation Bs share of the issuers voting securities acquired did not increase its percentage interest in the outstanding voting securities of that issuer.

Please contact me if any of the foregoing is not an accurate reflection of our telephone conversation. Thank you for your diligence in reviewing our inquiry.

Sincerely,

(redacted)

(redacted)

NO STAFF COMMENTS

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.