Maremont Corporation
Volume 76 · 76 F.T.C. 1058
Extraction note: this decision's boundaries or caption were hard to read automatically; check the source volume.
Cite this decision
Maremont Corporation, 76 F.T.C. 1058 (1969). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v076-0145
Report an error in this record (decision id v076-0145)
Cited by 0 later FTC decisions
Cites
Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)
MAREMONT CORPORATION Docket 8763. 01'de1' , July, 1969 Order denying responnent' s motion for reconsideration of Commission s order denying respondent' s request to withdraw matter from adjudication for the purpose of negotiating a consent order and for oral presentation. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF PRIOR ORDER AND FOR ORAL PRESENTATION This matter is before the Commission upon respondent' s motion fied July 9 , 1969 , for reconsideration of the Commission order of June 27, 1969, and a renewal of its request for oral presentation, asserting that apparently certain pertinent documents had not yet reached the Commission at the time it issued such order.
The Commission having considered al1 the documents fied in this proceeding, including the hearing examiner s amended order of certification filed June 20, 1969, and respondent's memorandum and request for oral presentation filed June 25, 1969, has determined that these contain no new 01' different facts or circumstances suffcient to justify modification of the Commission order issued June 27 , 1969, denying respondent' s request for withdrawal from adjudication. The Commission has further determined that it is fully advised by the submissions of counsel and that oral presentation would serve no useful purpose in the circumstances.
The Commission, in denying respondent' s request to withdraw pur)Jose of negotiating a this matter from adjudication for the consent settement, directed that the parties in any further such request submit in a motion a concrete proposal of settement. The Commission in this connection notes that if there is a possibility of a consent settlement of the case in whole or in part on the basis of an agreement between the parties and the entry of a consent order in the absence of a record of evidence, then the parties must negotiate the issues first and present a concrete proposal to the hearing examiner for his consideration and action pursuant to Section 3.22 of the Commission s Rules of Practice. Accordingly, Iti.s orde-red That respondent's 111otion for reconsideration of , de- the Commission s order of June 27 , 1969 be, and it hereby is nied.