UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
AT&T CORPORATION and
TELE-COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,
Defendants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. 1:98CV03170
Judge Emmet G. Sullivan
|
MOTION TO ESTABLISH
PROCEDURES FOR TERMINATION OF FINAL JUDGMENT
Plaintiff United States of America and Defendant AT&T Corporation ("AT&T," the
successor in interest to Tele-Communications, Inc.) and Liberty Media Corporation ("Liberty")
move this Court to enter an order establishing procedures for the termination of the Final
Judgment entered in this case, and in support of this motion, state as follows:
1. Plaintiff United States of America and Defendant AT&T and Liberty have entered into
a Stipulation to terminate the Final Judgment entered by this Court on August 23, 1999. The
United States has provisionally agreed to the termination. However, the United States as a matter
of policy does not consent to the termination of judgments without public notice and an
opportunity for public comment.
2. Therefore, the parties have agreed in the Stipulation to procedures providing all
potentially interested persons with adequate notice that a proposed termination of this Final
Judgment is pending, adequate notice of the reasons in support of the proposed termination, and
an adequate opportunity to comment. See United States v. Swift & Co., 1975-1 Trade Cas.
(CCH) ¶ 60,201 at 65,703 (N.D. Ill. 1975) (identifying these as minimum requirements when
considering judgment modification).
3. The United States, AT&T and Liberty have agreed that AT&T and Liberty will publish
notice at their expense.
Therefore, the United States, AT&T and Liberty move the Court to order:
- that AT&T and Liberty shall publish at their own expense a notice of the
proposed termination of the Final Judgment (in the form attached as the
Notice of Proposed Termination of the Final Judgment entered against
AT&T Corporation and Tele-Communications, Inc. on August 23, 1999,
Exhibit A) in two consecutive issues of (a) the Wall Street Journal and (b)
Wireless Week, and file proof of such publication with the Court;
- that copies of all comments received by the United States within sixty (60)
days after the last publication of the notices required by this Order and the
United States' responses be filed with this Court by the United States
within a reasonable period of time after the conclusion of the sixty (60) day
comment period, and;
- that this Court will not rule upon the joint motion of the United States and
AT&T and Liberty until at least the seventieth (70th) day after the last
publication of the notices required by this Order.
Respectfully submitted,
FOR PLAINTIFF THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA
_____________/s/______________
R. Hewitt Pate
D.C. Bar # 473598
Deputy Assistant Attorney General
_____________/s/______________
Constance K. Robinson
D.C. Bar # 244806
Director of Operations
|
_____________/s/______________
Nancy M. Goodman
D.C. Bar # 251694
Chief
Telecommunications and Media
Enforcement Section
_____________/s/______________
Peter A. Gray
PA Bar # 57628
Attorney
Telecommunications and Media
Enforcement Section
U.S. Department of Justice
Antitrust Division
1401 H. Street, N.W., Suite 8000
Washington, D.C. 20530
Telephone: (202) 514-5621
|
Dated: 2/21/02
FOR DEFENDANT AT&T CORPORATION
_____________/s/______________
Ilene Knable Gotts
NY Bar #
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen, & Katz
51 West 52nd Street
New York, New York 10019
Telephone: (212) 403-1247
Dated: 2/21/02
FOR LIBERTY MEDIA CORPORATION
_____________/s/______________
Kathryn M. Fenton
D.C. Bar # 250-944
Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue
51 Louisiana Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
Telephone: (202) 879-3746
Dated: 2/21/02
|