Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 231 / Tuesday, December 2, 2014 / Notices 71425 

appropriate action or make final the 

agreement’s proposed order. 

This matter involves respondent’s 

advertising of the PlayStation Vita (‘‘PS 

Vita’’), a gaming console. Respondent 

first offered the PS Vita for sale in the 

United States on February 22, 2012, for 

approximately $250. The PS Vita is part 

of respondent’s line of game consoles, 

including the PlayStation 3 video game 

console (‘‘PS3’’), which allows 

consumers to play video games on their 

television sets. Unlike the PS3, the PS 

Vita is a handheld, portable game 

console that allows consumers to play 

games away from their television sets. In 

addition to selling game consoles, 

respondent is one of the many game 

developers writing game titles for use on 

its PS3 and PS Vita game consoles. At 

the time the PS Vita was launched, 

‘‘MLB 12: The Show,’’ and ‘‘Killzone 3,’’ 

were popular SCEA game titles for the 

PS3. 

According to the complaint, 

respondent advertised several notable 

features of the PS Vita. First, respondent 

promoted the ‘‘remote play’’ feature of 

the PS Vita as a way that consumers 

could access games already residing on 

their PS3 consoles and play them 

remotely on the PS Vita anywhere with 

a Wi-Fi connection. Second, 

advertisements represented that, with 

the ‘‘cross platform gaming’’ or ‘‘cross 

save’’ feature, consumers could begin 

playing a game on a PS3 console, save 

their progress at any point in the game, 

and then continue that game where they 

left off on the PS Vita. Third, with the 

‘‘3G version’’ the PS Vita, available for 

an extra $50 and monthly fees, 

advertisements represented that 

consumers could access a 3G network to 

play games live with others 

(‘‘multiplayer gaming’’). The complaint 

alleges that respondent’s advertising of 

these features was false or misleading 

and thus violates the FTC Act. 

With respect to the remote play 

feature, the FTC’s complaint alleges that 

respondent misrepresented that, with 

this feature, PS Vita users can easily 

access their PS3 games on the PS Vita. 

According to the complaint, PS Vita 

users could not easily access their PS3 

games on the PS Vita. Indeed, most PS3 

games are not remote playable on the PS 

Vita, and respondent did not 

specifically design the PS3 system to 

support remote play functionality. In 

addition, the complaint alleges as false 

or misleading respondent’s claim that 

PS Vita users can, with remote play, 

easily access Killzone 3 and other 

similar, data-rich PS3 games. 

Respondent never enabled remote play 

on its Killzone 3 title, and very few, if 

any, data-rich PS3 games of similar size 

and complexity to Killzone 3 were 

remote play compatible on the PS Vita. 

The complaint also alleges that the 

respondent made false or misleading 

claims about the cross save feature of 

the PS Vita. Contrary to respondent’s 

advertisements, PS Vita users are not 

able to pause any PS3 game they are 

playing on their PS3 consoles at any 

point in the game, and continue to play 

that game where they left off on the PS 

Vita. The complaint states that this 

feature is available only for a limited 

number of PS3 game titles, and that the 

pause and save feature varies 

significantly by game. For example, 

with respect to ‘‘MLB 12: The Show,’’ 

consumers are able to pause and save 

the game to the PS Vita only after they 

have finished the entire baseball game 

(all nine innings) on the PS3. The 

complaint also alleges that with respect 

to this feature, respondent failed to 

disclose that, with games such as MLB 

12: The Show, consumers would have to 

own two versions of the same game, one 

for the PS3 and one for the PS Vita, to 

use this feature. 

Finally, the complaint addresses 

advertising claims made for features 

relating to the 3G version of the PS Vita. 

Specifically, the complaint alleges as 

false or misleading the representation 

that PS Vita users who own the 3G 

version are able to engage in live, 

multiplayer gaming through a 3G 

network. According to the complaint, 

PS Vita users are restricted to 

asynchronous or ‘‘turn-based’’ 

multiplayer gaming with the 3G version 

of the PS Vita. 

The proposed consent order contains 

provisions designed to prevent 

respondent from engaging in similar 

acts or practices in the future, as well as 

a provision to redress certain 

consumers. Part I of the order prohibits 

respondent from misrepresenting any 

material gaming feature or capability of 

any Handheld Game Console Product, 

when used as a standalone device to 

play video games. 

Part II of the proposed order prohibits 

respondent from making any 

representation about the material 

capability of any Handheld or Home 

Game Console Product to interact with, 

or connect to, any other Handheld Game 

Console Product during gaming, unless 

at the time it is made, respondent 

possesses and relies upon competent 

and reliable evidence that substantiates 

the representation. 

Part III of the proposed order 

prohibits respondent from making any 

representation about the material 

capability of any Handheld or Home 

Game Console Product to interact with, 

or connect to, any other Handheld or 

Home Game Console Product during 

gaming, unless it discloses, clearly and 

prominently, and in close proximity to 

the representation, that consumers must 

purchase two versions of the same video 

game, one for each console, if such is 

the case. 

Part IV of the proposed order provides 

for consumer redress to ‘‘eligible 

purchasers’’ of the PS Vita. The 

proposed order defines ‘‘eligible 

purchasers’’ as consumers who 

purchased the PS Vita before June 1, 

2012, and did not return it for a full 

refund. SCEA will offer these consumers 

$25 dollars in cash or credit or the 

alternative of a voucher (or other 

entitlement) for merchandise, video 

games, and/or services with a retail 

value of $50 or more. 

Part V of the proposed order contains 

recordkeeping requirements for 

advertisements and substantiation 

relevant to representations covered by 

Parts I through III of the order. 

Parts VI through VIII of the proposed 

order require the company to: Deliver a 

copy of the order to certain personnel 

having managerial responsibilities with 

respect to the subject matter of the 

order; notify the Commission of changes 

in corporate structure that might affect 

compliance obligations under the order; 

and file compliance reports with the 

Commission. 

Part IX of the proposed order provides 

that the order will terminate after 

twenty (20) years, with certain 

exceptions. 

The purpose of this analysis is to 

facilitate public comment on the 

proposed order, and it is not intended 

to constitute an official interpretation of 

the complaint or proposed order, or to 

modify the proposed order’s terms in 

any way. 

By direction of the Commission. 

Donald S. Clark, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2014–28346 Filed 12–1–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

National Institutes of Health 

Statement of Delegation of Authority 

Notice is hereby given that I have 

delegated to the Director, National 

Institutes of Health (NIH), or his or her 

successor, the authorities vested in the 

Secretary of Health and Human Services 

under Section 377E (a) of the HIV Organ 

Policy Equity Act, (Pub. L. 113–51), 

which amends the Public Health Service 

Act to require development and 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
71426 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 231 / Tuesday, December 2, 2014 / Notices 

publication of criteria for the conduct of 

research relating to transplantation of 

organs from donors infected with 

human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) 

into individuals who are infected with 

HIV before receiving such organ. 

These authorities may be redelegated. 

Exercise of this authority shall be in 

accordance with established policies, 

procedures, guidelines, and regulations 

as prescribed by the Secretary. The 

Secretary retains the authority to submit 

reports to Congress and promulgate 

regulations. 

I hereby affirm and ratify any actions 

taken by the Director, NIH, or his or her 

subordinates, which involved the 

exercise of the authorities delegated 

herein prior to the effective date of the 

delegation. 

Dated: November 25, 2014. 

Sylvia M. Burwell, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2014–28406 Filed 12–1–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4140–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Federal Financial Participation in State 

Assistance Expenditures; Federal 

Matching Shares for Medicaid, the 

Children’s Health Insurance Program, 

and Aid to Needy Aged, Blind, or 

Disabled Persons for October 1, 2015 

Through September 30, 2016 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Medical 

Assistance Percentages (FMAP), 

Enhanced Federal Medical Assistance 

Percentages (eFMAP), and disasterrecovery FMAP adjustments for Fiscal 

Year 2016 have been calculated 

pursuant to the Social Security Act (the 

Act). These percentages will be effective 

from October 1, 2015 through 

September 30, 2016. This notice 

announces the calculated FMAP rates 

that the U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS) will use in 

determining the amount of federal 

matching for state medical assistance 

(Medicaid), Temporary Assistance for 

Needy Families (TANF) Contingency 

Funds, Child Support Enforcement 

collections, Child Care Mandatory and 

Matching Funds of the Child Care and 

Development Fund, Foster Care Title 

IV–E Maintenance payments, and 

Adoption Assistance payments, and the 

eFMAP rates for the Children’s Health 

Insurance Program (CHIP) expenditures. 

Table 1 gives figures for each of the 50 

states, the District of Columbia, Puerto 

Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, 

American Samoa, and the 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands. This notice reminds states of 

available disaster-recovery FMAP 

adjustments for qualifying states, and 

adjustments available for states meeting 

requirements for negative growth in 

total state personal income. 

This notice also contains the 

increased eFMAPs for CHIP as 

authorized under the Patient Protection 

and Affordable Care Act (Affordable 

Care Act) for fiscal years 2016 through 

2019 (October 1, 2015 through 

September 30, 2019). 

Programs under title XIX of the Act 

exist in each jurisdiction. Programs 

under titles I, X, and XIV operate only 

in Guam and the Virgin Islands, while 

a program under title XVI (Aid to the 

Aged, Blind, or Disabled) operates only 

in Puerto Rico. The percentages in this 

notice apply to state expenditures for 

most medical assistance and child 

health assistance, and assistance 

payments for certain social services. The 

Act provides separately for federal 

matching of administrative costs. 

Sections 1905(b) and 1101(a)(8)(B) of 

the Social Security Act (the Act) require 

the Secretary of HHS to publish the 

FMAP rates each year. The Secretary 

calculates the percentages, using 

formulas in sections 1905(b) and 

1101(a)(8), and calculations by the 

Department of Commerce of average 

income per person in each state and for 

the Nation as a whole. The percentages 

must fall within the upper and lower 

limits specified in section 1905(b) of the 

Act. The percentages for the District of 

Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin 

Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and 

the Northern Mariana Islands are 

specified in statute, and thus are not 

based on the statutory formula that 

determines the percentages for the 50 

states. 

Federal Medical Assistance Percentage 

(FMAP) 

Section 1905(b) of the Act specifies 

the formula for calculating FMAPs as 

follows: 

‘‘ ‘‘Federal medical assistance percentage’’ 

for any state shall be 100 per centum less the 

state percentage; and the state percentage 

shall be that percentage which bears the same 

ratio to 45 per centum as the square of the 

per capita income of such state bears to the 

square of the per capita income of the 

continental United States (including Alaska) 

and Hawaii; except that (1) the Federal 

medical assistance percentage shall in no 

case be less than 50 per centum or more than 

83 per centum, (2) the Federal medical 

assistance percentage for Puerto Rico, the 

Virgin Islands, Guam, the Northern Mariana 

Islands, and American Samoa shall be 55 

percent. . . .’’ 

Section 4725(b) of the Balanced 

Budget Act of 1997 amended section 

1905(b) to provide that the FMAP for 

the District of Columbia for purposes of 

titles XIX and XXI shall be 70 percent. 

For the District of Columbia, we note 

under Table 1 that other rates may apply 

in certain other programs. In addition, 

we note the rate that applies for Puerto 

Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, 

American Samoa, and the 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands in certain other programs 

pursuant to section 1118 of the Act. The 

rates for the States, District of Columbia 

and the territories are displayed in 

Table 1, Column 1. 

Section 1905(y) of the Act, as added 

by section 2001 of the Patient Protection 

and Affordable Care Act of 2010 

(’’Affordable Care Act’’), provides for a 

significant increase in the Federal 

Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) 

for medical expenditures for individuals 

determined eligible under the new adult 

group in the state and who will be 

considered to be ‘‘newly eligible’’ in 

2014, as defined in section 1905(y)(2)(A) 

of the Act. The FMAP for these newly 

eligible individuals will be 100 percent 

for Calendar Years 2014, 2015, and 

2016, gradually declining to 90 percent 

in 2020 where it remains indefinitely. In 

addition, section 1905(z) of the Act, as 

added by section 10201 of the 

Affordable Care Act, provides that states 

that had expanded substantial coverage 

to low-income parents and nonpregnant 

adults without children prior to the 

enactment of the Affordable Care Act, 

referred to as ‘‘expansion states,’’ shall 

receive an enhanced FMAP that begins 

in 2014 for nonpregnant childless adults 

who may be required to enroll in 

benchmark coverage. These provisions 

are discussed in more detail in the 

Medicaid Eligibility proposed rule 

published on August 17, 2011 (76 FR 

51172) and the final rule published on 

March 23, 2012 (77 FR 17143). 

Adjustments to the FMAP 

For purposes of Title XIX (Medicaid) 

of the Social Security Act, the Federal 

Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP), 

defined in section 1905(b) of the Social 

Security Act, for each state beginning 

with fiscal year 2006 is subject to an 

adjustment pursuant to section 614 of 

the Children’s Health Insurance 

Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 

(CHIPRA), Public Law 111–3. Section 

614 of CHIPRA stipulates that a state’s 

FMAP under Title XIX (Medicaid) must 

be adjusted in two situations. 

In the first situation, if a state 

experiences positive growth in total 

personal income and an employer in 

that state has made a significantly 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES