[Federal Register: November 12, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 219)]
[Notices]               
[Page 66938-66939]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr12no08-117]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division

 
United States v. Bell Atlantic Corporation; Proposed Modification 
of Final Judgment

    Notice is hereby given that a Motion to Modify the Final Judgment, 
Stipulation, and Memorandum in Support of the Motion to Modify the 
Final Judgment, have been filed with the United States District Court 
for the District of Columbia in United States v. Bell Atlantic 
Corporation, Civil No. 1 :99CV0 1119. On May 7, 1999, the United States 
filed a Complaint (and a Supplemental Complaint on December 6, 1999) 
alleging that the proposed merger between Bell Atlantic Corporation and 
GTE Corporation (the merged firm known as ``Verizon Communications 
Inc.'') and the proposed joint venture between Bell Atlantic and 
Vodafone AirTouch Plc (the joint venture now known as ``Verizon 
Wireless'') would violate Section 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 18, 
by substantially lessening competition in wireless mobile telephone 
service in certain areas of Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, 
Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Montana, New Mexico, Ohio, South Carolina, 
Texas, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.
    The Final Judgment, entered on April 18, 2000, required the 
defendants to divest certain mobile wireless telecommunications 
services businesses. Divestitures were made to Ailtel in 25 Cellular 
Market Areas (``CMAs''). The modification would allow the defendants to 
reacquire the divested wireless system assets in 22 of those CMAs--
Cleveland MSA (CMA 16), Tampa MSA (CMA 22), Phoenix MSA (CMA 26), Akron 
MSA (CMA 52), Greenville SC MSA (CMA 67), Tucson MSA (CMA 77), El Paso 
TX MSA (CMA 81), Mobile MSA (CMA 83), Albuquerque MSA (CMA 86), Canton 
MSA (CMA 87), Lakeland MSA (CMA 114), Pensacola MSA (CMA 127), Lorain 
MSA (CMA 136), Ft. Myers MSA (CMA 164), Sarasota MSA (CMA 167), 
Bradenton MSA (CMA 211), AZ RSA 2 (CMA 319), FL RSA 1 (CMA 360), FL RSA 
2 (CMA 361), FL RSA 3 (CMA 362), FL RSA 4 (CMA 363), and FL RSA 11 (CMA 
370). The modification would allow the defendants to reacquire three 
additional CMAs--Anderson SC MSA (CMA 227), Las Cruces NM MSA (CMA 285) 
and OH RSA 3 (CMA 587)--only until the assets are divested according to 
terms specified in the Modified Final Judgment.

[[Page 66939]]

    Copies of the Motion to Modify the Final Judgment, Stipulation, 
Memorandum in Support of the Motion to Modify the Final Judgment, and 
all other papers with the Court in connection with the motion are 
available for inspection at the Department of Justice, Antitrust 
Division, Antitrust Documents Group, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Suite 1010, 
Washington, DC 20530 (202-514-2481), on the Department of Justice Web 
site (http://www.usdoj.gov/atr), and at the Office of the Clerk of the 
United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Copies of 
these materials may be obtained from the Antitrust Division upon 
request and payment of the copying fee set by Department of Justice 
Regulations. Public comment is invited within 30 days of the date of 
this notice. Such comments, and responses thereto, will be published in 
the Federal Register and filed with the Court. Comments should be 
directed to Nancy Goodman, Chief, Telecommunications & Media 
Enforcement Section, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 
City Center Building, 1401 H Street, NW., Suite 8000, Washington, DC 
20530 (202-514-5621).

J. Robert Kramer II,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
 [FR Doc. E8-26563 Filed 11-10-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M