3744 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 16 / Monday, January 26, 1998 / Notices

1Copies of the Complaint and the Decision and

Order are available from the Commission’s Public

Reference Branch, H–130, 600 Pennsylvania

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Robert E. Feldman,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–1674 Filed 1–23–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6714–01–M

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Dkt. C–3723]

Boeing Co.; Prohibited Trade

Practices, and Affirmative Corrective

Actions

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Consent order.

SUMMARY: In settlement of alleged

violations of federal law prohibiting

unfair or deceptive acts or practices and

unfair methods of competition, this

consent order involves the Boeing

Company’s acquisition of Rockwell

International Corporation’s aerospace

and defense business and the

competition in the markets for high

altitude endurance unmanned air

vehicles (‘‘UAVs’’) and space launch

vehicles. The consent order, among

other things, gives Teledyne Ryan, the

prime contractor of one team, the

opportunity to replace Boeing on that

team, thereby protecting competition in

the UAVs market. The consent order

also establishes a ‘‘firewall’’ to prevent

the flow of competitively sensitive

information between Boeing’s team and

a division of Rockwell International

Corporation’s aerospace and defense

business that is currently providing

wings to the other teams, establishes a

firewall that prevents Boeing from

making any space launch vehicle

manufacturer’s non-public information

available to its launch vehicle division,

and allows Boeing to use such

information only in its capacity as a

propulsion system provider.

DATES: Complaint and Order issued

March 5, 1997.1

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George Cary, FTC/H–374, Washington,

DC 20580. (202) 326–3741.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

Monday, December 16, 1996, there was

published in the Federal Register, 61 FR

66038, a proposed consent agreement

with analysis In the Matter of The

Boeing Company, for the purpose of

soliciting public comment. Interested

parties were given sixty (60) days in

which to submit comments, suggestions

or objections regarding the proposed

form of the order.

No comments having been received,

the Commission has ordered the

issuance of the complaint in the form

contemplated by the agreement, made

its jurisdictional findings and entered

an order to cease and desist, modified

as set forth in the proposed consent

agreement, in disposition of this

proceeding.

(Sec. 6, 38 Stat. 721; 15 U.S.C. 46. Interprets

or applies sec. 5, 38 Stat. 719, as amended;

15 U.S.C. 45)

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–1797 Filed 1–23–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

[File Nos. 972–3190; 972–3191; and 972–

3192]

Grey Advertising, Inc.; Rubin Postaer

and Associates, Inc.; and Foote, Cone

& Belding Advertising, Inc.—Analysis

to Aid Public Comment

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Proposed consent agreements.

SUMMARY: The consent agreements in

these matters settle 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 complaints that accompany the

consent agreements and the terms of the

consent orders—embodied in the

consent agreements—that would settle

these allegations.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before March 27, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary,

Room 159, 6th St. and Pa. Ave., NW.,

Washington, DC 20580.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Medine, FTC/S–4429,

Washington, DC 20580. (202) 326–3224.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade

Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.

46 and § 2.34 of the Commission’s rules

of practice (16 CFR 2.34), notice is

hereby given that the above-captioned

consent agreements containing consent

orders to cease and desist, having been

filed with and accepted, subject to final

approval, by the Commission, have been

placed on the public record for a period

of sixty (60) days. The following

Analysis to Aid Public Comment

describes the terms of the consent

agreements, and the allegations in the

complaints. An electronic copy of the

full text of the consent agreement

packages can be obtained from the FTC

Home Page (for January 20, 1998), on

the World Wide Web, at ‘‘http://

www.ftc.gov/os/actions/htm.’’ A paper

copy can be obtained from the FTC

Public Reference Room, Room H–130,

Sixth Street and Pennsylvania Avenue,

NW., Washington, DC 20580, either in

person or by calling (202) 326–3627.

Public comment is invited. Such

comments or views will be considered

by the Commission and will be available

for inspection and copying at its

principal office in accordance with

§ 4.9(b)(6)(ii) of the Commission’s rules

of practice (16 CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii)).

Analysis of Proposed Consent Orders to

Aid Public Comment

The Federal Trade Commission has

accepted separate agreements, subject to

final approval, to proposed consent

orders from three advertising agencies—

Grey Advertising, Inc. (‘‘Grey’’), Rubin

Postaer and Associates, Inc. (‘’Rubin

Postaer’’), and Foote, Cone & Belding,

Inc., (‘‘FCB’’) (collectively referred to as

‘‘respondents’’).

The proposed consent orders have

been placed on the public record for

sixty (60) days for reception of

comments by interested persons.

Comments received during this period

will become part of the public record.

After sixty (60) days, the Commission

will again review the agreements and

the comments received and will decide

whether it should withdraw from the

agreements or make final the

agreements’ proposed orders.

These matters concern automobile

lease and/or credit advertisements at

issue in the Federal Trade Commission’s

enforcement actions against Mitsubishi

Motor Sales of America, Inc.

(‘‘Mitsubishi’’), Dkt. No. C–3713,

American Honda Motor Corporation,

Inc. (‘‘Honda’’), Dkt. No. C–3711, and

Mazda Motor of America, Inc.

(‘‘Mazda’’), Dkt. No. C–3714. The

complaints allege that Grey, Rubin

Postaer, and FCB, the advertising

agencies for Mitsubishi, Honda, and

Mazda, respectively, created and

disseminated automobile lease

advertisements that violate the Federal

Trade Commission Act (‘‘FTC Act’’), the

Consumer Leasing Act (‘‘CLA’’), and

Regulation M. The complaint against

Grey also alleges that respondent Grey’s

automobile credit advertisements

violated the FTC Act, the Truth in

Lending Act (‘‘TILA’’), and Regulation

Z.

Section 5 of the FTC Act prohibits

false, misleading, or deceptive

representations or omissions of material

information in advertisements. In

addition, Congress established statutory