Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2013 / Notices 3425 

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION 

Ocean Transportation Intermediary 

License Revocations 

The Commission gives notice that the 

following Ocean Transportation 

Intermediary licenses have been 

revoked pursuant to section 19 of the 

Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. 40101) 

effective on the date shown. 

License No.: 013253N. 

Name: Total Service Line Corporation 

dba Total Shipping Line Corp. 

Address: 12140 East Artestia Blvd., 

Suite 208, Artesia, CA 90701. 

Date Revoked: November 11, 2012. 

Reason: Failed to maintain a valid 

bond. 

License No.: 017580N. 

Name: E-Trans Logistic Services, Inc. 

Address: 17595 Almahurst Road, 

Suite 211, City of Industry, CA 91748. 

Date Revoked: November 18, 2012. 

Reason: Failed to maintain a valid 

bond. 

License No.: 020933N. 

Name: Surexpress, Inc. 

Address: 7040 Motz Street, 

Paramount, CA 90723. 

Date Revoked: November 5, 2012. 

Reason: Voluntary Surrender of 

License. 

License No.: 021296NF. 

Name: ITW International, Inc. 

Address: 2889 Plaza Del Amo, #312, 

Torrance, CA 90503. 

Date Revoked: November 5, 2012. 

Reason: Voluntary Surrender of 

License. 

Vern W. Hill, 

Director, Bureau of Certification and 

Licensing. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00832 Filed 1–15–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6730–01–P 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

Change in Bank Control Notices; 

Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or 

Bank Holding Company 

The notificants listed below have 

applied under the Change in Bank 

Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and 

§ 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 

CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank 

or bank holding company. The factors 

that are considered in acting on the 

notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of 

the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). 

The notices are available for 

immediate inspection at the Federal 

Reserve Bank indicated. The notices 

also will be available for inspection at 

the offices of the Board of Governors. 

Interested persons may express their 

views in writing to the Reserve Bank 

indicated for that notice or to the offices 

of the Board of Governors. Comments 

must be received not later than January 

31, 2013. 

A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago 

(Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice 

President) 230 South LaSalle Street, 

Chicago, Illinois 60690–1414: 

1. Robert M. Wrobel Trust, Mr. Robert 

Wrobel, Glencoe, Illinois, as Trustee; the 

Debra Wrobel Trust, Debra Wrobel, 

Glencoe, Illinois, as Trustee; three 

related Wrobel Family Trusts, Debra 

Wrobel, Glencoe, Illinois, as Trustee; 

and Dr. Jack Havdala, Jonesboro, 

Arkansas; as a group acting in concert, 

to acquire at least 25 percent of the 

voting shares of Amalgamated 

Investments Company, and thereby 

indirectly acquire voting shares of 

Amalgamated Bank of Chicago, both in 

Chicago, Illinois. 

2. Stanley Dickson, Jr., Gross Pointe 

Park, Michigan, as an individual, and 

the group consisting of Stanley Dickson, 

Jr., Gross Pointe Park, Michigan; Steven 

Dickson, Rancho Santa Fe, California; 

Kathryn J. Dickson, Howell, Michigan; 

and Riddle Limited Partnership, Howell, 

Michigan; to acquire voting shares of 

FNBH Bancorp, Inc., and thereby 

indirectly acquire voting shares of First 

National Bank in Howell, both in 

Howell, Michigan. 

B. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas 

City (Dennis Denney, Assistant Vice 

President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas 

City, Missouri 64198–0001: 

1. Dalene M. Selko, Meade, Nebraska; 

to acquire voting shares of Selko Banco, 

Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire 

voting shares of Bank of Mead, both in 

Mead, Nebraska. 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, January 11, 2013. 

Margaret McCloskey Shanks, 

Deputy Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00769 Filed 1–15–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

Formations of, Acquisitions by, and 

Mergers of Bank Holding Companies 

The companies listed in this notice 

have applied to the Board for approval, 

pursuant to the Bank Holding Company 

Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) 

(BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 

225), and all other applicable statutes 

and regulations to become a bank 

holding company and/or to acquire the 

assets or the ownership of, control of, or 

the power to vote shares of a bank or 

bank holding company and all of the 

banks and nonbanking companies 

owned by the bank holding company, 

including the companies listed below. 

The applications listed below, as well 

as other related filings required by the 

Board, are available for immediate 

inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 

indicated. The applications will also be 

available for inspection at the offices of 

the Board of Governors. Interested 

persons may express their views in 

writing on the standards enumerated in 

the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the 

proposal also involves the acquisition of 

a nonbanking company, the review also 

includes whether the acquisition of the 

nonbanking company complies with the 

standards in section 4 of the BHC Act 

(12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise 

noted, nonbanking activities will be 

conducted throughout the United States. 

Unless otherwise noted, comments 

regarding each of these applications 

must be received at the Reserve Bank 

indicated or the offices of the Board of 

Governors not later than February 11, 

2013. 

A. Federal Reserve Bank of New York 

(Ivan Hurwitz, Vice President) 33 

Liberty Street, New York, New York 

10045–0001: 

1. The Adirondack Trust Company 

Employee Stock Ownership Trust, 

Saratoga Springs, New York; to acquire 

50 additional shares of 473 Broadway 

Holding Corporation, and 2,000 

additional shares of The Adirondack 

Trust Company, both in Saratoga 

Springs, New York. 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, January 11, 2013. 

Margaret McCloskey Shanks, 

Deputy Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00768 Filed 1–15–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

[File No. 112 3195] 

Filiquarian Publishing, LLC; Choice 

Level, LLC; and Joshua Linsk; 

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order 

To Aid Public Comment 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed Consent Agreement. 

SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this 

matter settles alleged violations of 

federal law prohibiting unfair or 

deceptive acts or practices or unfair 

methods of competition. The attached 

Analysis to Aid Public Comment 

describes both the allegations in the 

draft complaint and the terms of the 

consent order—embodied in the consent 

agreement—that would settle these 

allegations. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

3426 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2013 / Notices 

1 In particular, the written request for confidential 

treatment that accompanies the comment must 

include the factual and legal basis for the request, 

and must identify the specific portions of the 

comment to be withheld from the public record. See 

FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 11, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a 

comment at https://ftcpublic.comment

works.com/ftc/filiquarianconsent online 

or on paper, by following the 

instructions in the Request for Comment 

part of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section below. Write ‘‘Filiquarian, File 

No. 112 3195’’ on your comment and 

file your comment online at https://ftc

public.commentworks.com/ftc/fili

quarianconsent by following the 

instructions on the web-based form. If 

you prefer to file your comment on 

paper, mail or deliver your comment to 

the following address: Federal Trade 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 

Room H–113 (Annex D), 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20580. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jessica Lyon (202–326–2344), FTC, 

Bureau of Consumer Protection, 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20580. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to Section 6(f) of the Federal Trade 

Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and 

FTC Rule 2.34, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is 

hereby given that the above-captioned 

consent agreement containing a consent 

order to cease and desist, having been 

filed with and accepted, subject to final 

approval, by the Commission, has been 

placed on the public record for a period 

of thirty (30) days. The following 

Analysis to Aid Public Comment 

describes the terms of the consent 

agreement, and the allegations in the 

complaint. An electronic copy of the 

full text of the consent agreement 

package can be obtained from the FTC 

Home Page (for January 10, 2013), on 

the World Wide Web, at http:// 

www.ftc.gov/os/actions.shtm. A paper 

copy can be obtained from the FTC 

Public Reference Room, Room 130–H, 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20580, either in person 

or by calling (202) 326–2222. 

You can file a comment online or on 

paper. For the Commission to consider 

your comment, we must receive it on or 

before February 11, 2013. Write 

‘‘Filiquarian, File No. 112 3195’’ on 

your comment. Your comment— 

including your name and your state— 

will be placed on the public record of 

this proceeding, including, to the extent 

practicable, on the public Commission 

Web site, at http://www.ftc.gov/os/ 

publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of 

discretion, the Commission tries to 

remove individuals’ home contact 

information from comments before 

placing them on the Commission Web 

site. 

Because your comment will be made 

public, you are solely responsible for 

making sure that your comment does 

not include any sensitive personal 

information, like anyone’s Social 

Security number, date of birth, driver’ 

license number or other state 

identification number or foreign country 

equivalent, passport number, financial 

account number, or credit or debit card 

number. You are also solely responsible 

for making sure that your comment does 

not include any sensitive health 

information, like medical records or 

other individually identifiable health 

information. In addition, do not include 

any ‘‘[t]rade secret or any commercial or 

financial information which * * * is 

privileged or confidential,’’ as discussed 

in Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 

46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 

4.10(a)(2). In particular, do not include 

competitively sensitive information 

such as costs, sales statistics, 

inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, 

manufacturing processes, or customer 

names. 

If you want the Commission to give 

your comment confidential treatment, 

you must file it in paper form, with a 

request for confidential treatment, and 

you have to follow the procedure 

explained in FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 

4.9(c).1 Your comment will be kept 

confidential only if the FTC General 

Counsel, in his or her sole discretion, 

grants your request in accordance with 

the law and the public interest. 

Postal mail addressed to the 

Commission is subject to delay due to 

heightened security screening. As a 

result, we encourage you to submit your 

comments online. To make sure that the 

Commission considers your online 

comment, you must file it at https://

ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/fili

quarianconsent by following the 

instructions on the web-based form. If 

this Notice appears at http:// 

www.regulations.gov/#!home, you also 

may file a comment through that Web 

site. 

If you file your comment on paper, 

write ‘‘Filiquarian, File No. 112 3195’’ 

on your comment and on the envelope, 

and mail or deliver it to the following 

address: Federal Trade Commission, 

Office of the Secretary, Room H–113 

(Annex D), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20580. If possible, 

submit your paper comment to the 

Commission by courier or overnight 

service. 

Visit the Commission Web site at 

http://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice 

and the news release describing it. The 

FTC Act and other laws that the 

Commission administers permit the 

collection of public comments to 

consider and use in this proceeding as 

appropriate. The Commission will 

consider all timely and responsive 

public comments that it receives on or 

before February 11, 2013. You can find 

more information, including routine 

uses permitted by the Privacy Act, in 

the Commission’s privacy policy, at 

http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm. 

Analysis of Agreement Containing 

Consent Order To Aid Public Comment 

The Federal Trade Commission has 

accepted, subject to final approval, an 

agreement containing a consent order 

from Filiquarian Publishing, LLC; 

Choice Level, LLC; and Joshua Linsk, 

individually, and as an officer of the 

companies. 

The proposed consent order has been 

placed on the public record for thirty 

(30) days for receipt of comments by 

interested persons. Comments received 

during this period will become part of 

the public record. After thirty (30) days, 

the Commission will again review the 

agreement and the comments received, 

and will decide whether it should 

withdraw from the agreement and take 

appropriate action or make final the 

agreement’s proposed order. 

The Commission’s proposed 

administrative complaint alleges that 

the companies were operating as 

consumer reporting agencies without 

any procedures or policies in place to 

comply with the Fair Credit Reporting 

Act (‘‘FCRA’’). 

The respondents sold background 

screening reports containing criminal 

records through mobile applications 

(‘‘apps’’) available in the iTunes and 

Google Android store (now GooglePlay) 

and through a Web site. Filiquarian 

developed and marketed apps that sold 

for $0.99 each and allowed purchasers 

to conduct unlimited searches of 

criminal history information within a 

specific geographic area, such as a state 

or county. Each app included an express 

representation that purchasers could use 

the reports for employment purposes. 

Choice Level provided the underlying 

records accessed by purchasers of the 

Filiquarian apps. Joshua Linsk is the 

owner and sole officer of Filiquarian 

and Choice Level. During all times 

material to this complaint, Linsk, 

individually or in concert with others, 

formulated, directed, or controlled the 

policies, acts, or practices of the 

companies. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2013 / Notices 3427 

1The licensing obligation in this matter was a 

FRAND obligation, although RAND (reasonable and 

non-discriminatory) licensing obligations raise 

similar issues. 

2Commissioners Rosch and Ohlhausen do not 

join this Statement (with Commissioner Ohlhausen 

voting against the consent agreement) and have 

issued separate statements expressing their views. 

3See In re Dell Computer Corp., 121 F.T.C. 616 

(1996); In re Union Oil Company of California, 2004 

FTC LEXIS 115 (July 7, 2004); In re Rambus, Inc., 

Dkt. No. 9302, 2006 FTC LEXIS 101 (Aug. 20, 2006), 

rev’d, Rambus Inc. v. F.T.C., 522 F.3d 456 (DC Cir. 

2008); In re Negotiated Data Solutions LLC, FTC 

File No. 051–0094, Decision and Order (Jan. 23, 

2008), available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/

0510094/080122do.pdf; In re Robert Bosch GmbH, 

FTC File N. 121–0081, Decision and Order (Nov. 26, 

2012), available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/

1210081/121126boschdo.pdf. 

4See, e.g., Allied Tube & Conduit Corp. v. Indian 

Head, Inc., 486 U.S. 492, 500–01 (1988) (noting that 

Continued 

According to the complaint, despite 

Filiquarian clearly promoting its 

background reports for use in 

employment screening, both Filiquarian 

and Choice Level included disclaimers 

in their terms and conditions stating 

that their reports were not to be 

considered a screening product for 

insurance, employment, or credit, and 

that they were not compliant with the 

FCRA. Such disclaimers contradicted 

and failed to counteract the express 

representations made in Filiquarian’s 

advertising, urging the use of the reports 

to screen potential employees. 

Marketing and selling background 

screening reports to potential employers 

without implementing any of the 

accuracy or dispute safeguards required 

by the FCRA potentially exposes a large 

number of consumers to harm to their 

reputations and employment prospects. 

The complaint alleges that the reports 

produced by respondents were 

consumer reports under the FCRA and 

that respondents lacked any policies or 

procedures to comply with the FCRA. 

Specifically, the complaint alleges that 

respondents failed to adhere to three 

key requirements of the FCRA: to 

maintain reasonable procedures to 

verify who their users are and that the 

information would be used for a 

permissible purpose; to ensure that the 

information they provided in consumer 

reports was accurate; and to provide 

notices to users and to those who 

furnished proposed respondents with 

information that was included in 

consumer reports. The complaint 

further alleges that by their violations of 

the FCRA, as stated above, proposed 

respondents have engaged in unfair and 

deceptive acts and practices, in 

violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal 

Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 45(a). 

The proposed consent order contains 

provisions designed to prevent the 

respondents from engaging in the future 

in practices similar to those alleged in 

the complaint. 

Part I of the order includes injunctive 

relief requiring respondents to comply 

with the relevant provisions of the 

FCRA. Parts II through VI are reporting 

and compliance provisions. Part II 

requires respondents to retain 

documents relating to their compliance 

with the order for a five-year period. 

Part III requires dissemination of the 

order now and in the future to persons 

with responsibilities relating to the 

subject matter of the order. Part IV 

ensures notification to the FTC of 

changes in corporate status. Part V 

mandates that respondents submit a 

compliance report to the FTC within 60 

days, and periodically thereafter as 

requested. Part VI is a provision 

‘‘sunsetting’’ the order after twenty (20) 

years, with certain exceptions. 

The purpose of this analysis is to aid 

public comment on the proposed order. 

It is not intended to constitute an 

official interpretation of the proposed 

order or to modify its terms in any way. 

By direction of the Commission. 

Richard C. Donohue, 

Acting Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00744 Filed 1–15–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

[File No. 121–0120] 

Motorola Mobility LLC and Google Inc.; 

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order 

To Aid Public Comment 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed consent agreement; 

correction. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade 

Commission published a document in 

the Federal Register of January 11, 

2013, requesting public comments on an 

analysis of proposed consent order to 

aid public comment. The document 

inadvertently did not include the 

Statement of the Commission. This 

document contains the Statement of the 

Commission. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard Feinstein or Pete Levitas (202– 

326–2555), FTC, Bureau of Competition, 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20580. 

Correction 

In the Federal Register of January 11, 

2013, in FR Doc. 2013–00465, on page 

2402, the third column, second 

paragraph (after ‘‘Richard C. Donohue, 

Acting Secretary,’’ but before the 

‘‘Statement of Commissioner Rosch,’’) 

insert the following Statement of the 

Commission: 

Statement of the Federal Trade 

Commission 

The Federal Trade Commission has 

today voted to issue for public comment 

a Complaint and Order against Google 

Inc. (‘‘Google’’) designed to remedy 

Google’s allegedly anticompetitive 

conduct resulting from breaches by 

Google and its subsidiary Motorola 

Mobility, Inc. (‘‘Motorola’’) of 

Motorola’s commitments to license 

standard-essential patents (‘‘SEPs’’) on 

terms that are fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory (‘‘FRAND’’).1 The 

Complaint alleges that, before its 

acquisition by Google, Motorola reneged 

on a licensing commitment made to 

several standard-setting bodies to 

license its standard-essential patents 

relating to smartphones, tablet 

computers, and video game systems on 

FRAND terms by seeking injunctions 

against willing licensees of those SEPs.2

This conduct tended to impair 

competition in the market for these 

important electronic devices—products 

that over half of Americans own and use 

daily, including iPhones, iPads and 

Xboxes. After purchasing Motorola for 

$12.5 billion in June 2012, Google 

continued Motorola’s conduct. These 

actions constitute unfair methods of 

competition, as well as unfair acts and 

practices, in violation of Section 5 of the 

Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 

U.S.C. 45. 

Google’s settlement with the 

Commission requires Google to 

withdraw its claims for injunctive relief 

on FRAND-encumbered SEPs around 

the world, and to offer a FRAND license 

to any company that wants to license 

Google’s SEPs in the future. If accepted 

by the Commission, the Proposed Order 

may set a template for the resolution of 

SEP licensing disputes across many 

industries, and reduce the costly and 

inefficient need for companies to amass 

patents for purely defensive purposes in 

industries where standard-compliant 

products are the norm. 

The Commission has a long history of 

using its enforcement authority to 

safeguard the integrity of the standardsetting process.3 Standard setting can 

deliver substantial benefits to American 

consumers, promoting innovation, 

competition, and consumer choice. But 

standard setting often supplants the 

competitive process with the collective 

decision-making of competitors, 

requiring that we be vigilant in 

protecting the integrity of the standardsetting process.4 Today’s Commission 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with