Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version


This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.


   Before the

   Federal Communications Commission

   Washington, D.C. 20554

   In the Matter of )


   American Future Technology Corporation ) File No. EB-06-SE-093

   d/b/a iBuypower ) NAL/Acct. No. 200732100008

   ) FRN # 0015839814



   Adopted:  December  12, 2006 Released: December  14, 2006

   By the Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau:


    1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture ("NAL"), we find
       American Future Technology Corporation d/b/a iBuypower ("iBuypower")
       apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of fourteen thousand
       dollars ($14,000) for apparent willful and repeated violation of
       Section 302(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act"),
       and Section 2.803(a)(2) of the Commission's Rules ("Rules"). The noted
       apparent violations involve iBuypower's marketing of unauthorized
       computers to the general public.


    1. By letter dated November 29, 2005, the Commission's Office of
       Engineering and Technology ("OET") notified iBuypower of the apparent
       improper marketing of its AMD Athlon-64 and Athlon-64 X2 computers.
       Specifically, OET noted that iBuypower was marketing the computers to
       the general public prior to obtaining a Declaration of Conformity
       ("DoC"). OET subsequently referred the matter to the Enforcement
       Bureau for investigation. On May 22, 2006, the Enforcement Bureau sent
       iBuypower a letter of inquiry ("LOI").

    2. In its response to the LOI, dated June 23, 2006, iBuypower states that
       it has manufactured and marketed computer models featuring the AMD
       Athlon-64 processor since approximately December 2003 and that it has
       manufactured and marketed computer models featuring the AMD Atlon-64
       X2 processor since approximately June 2005. iBuypower acknowledges
       that it sold approximately 7,500 computers featuring the AMD Athlon-64
       processor and approximately 2,400 computers featuring AMD Athlon-64 X2
       processor prior to completion of the DOC procedure. However, it
       asserts that it has endeavored to build the systems from parts which
       have been tested and are covered by a current DoC. iBuypower states
       that it believed that systems built from approved components did not
       themselves require a separate DoC. Finally, iBuypower indicates that
       it completed a DoC for its computer systems on January 23, 2006, after
       receipt of OET's initial notification.


    3. Section 302(b) of the Act provides that "[n]o person shall
       manufacture, import, sell, offer for sale, or ship devices or home
       electronic equipment and systems, or use devices, which fail to comply
       with regulations promulgated pursuant to this section." Section
       2.803(a)(2) of the Commission's implementing regulations provides

   ... [N]o person shall sell or lease, or offer for sale or lease (including
   advertising for sale or lease), or import, ship, or distribute for the
   purpose of selling or leasing or offering for sale or lease, any radio
   frequency device unless ... [i]n the case of a device that is not required
   to have a grant of equipment authorization issued by the Commission, but
   which must comply with the specified technical standards prior to use,
   such device also complies with all applicable administrative (including
   verification  of the equipment or authorization under a Declaration of
   Conformity, where required), technical, labeling and identification
   requirements specified in this chapter.

   Pursuant to Section 15.101 of the Rules, a DOC must accompany all Class B
   personal computers. Furthermore, Section 15.102(b)(4) requires that
   computer systems that are assembled from authorized component parts must
   themselves be authorized under a DoC. iBuypower does not dispute that it
   marketed its completed computer systems featuring the AMD Athlon-64 and
   Athlon-64 X2 processors prior to obtaining a DoC. Accordingly, we find
   that iBuypower apparently willfully and repeatedly  violated Section
   302(b) of the Act and Section 2.803(a)(2) Rules by marketing unauthorized
   computer systems.

    2. Section 503(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to assess a
       forfeiture for each willful or repeated violation of the Act or of any
       rule, regulation, or order issued by the Commission under the Act. In
       exercising such authority, we are required to take into account "the
       nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the violation and, with
       respect to the violator, the degree of culpability, any history of
       prior offenses, ability to pay, and such other matters as justice may

    3. Pursuant to The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment
       of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines
       ("Forfeiture Policy Statement") and Section 1.80 of the Rules, the
       base forfeiture amount for the marketing of unauthorized equipment is
       $7,000. In this case, iBuypower marketed two unauthorized computer
       systems, one featuring the AMD Athlon-64 processor and one featuring
       the Athlon-64 X2 processor. iBuypower's marketing of each unauthorized
       computer system is a separate violation. We find that a proposed
       forfeiture amount of $7,000 is apparently warranted for each violation
       for a total proposed forfeiture of $14,000. Accordingly, applying the
       Forfeiture Policy Statement and statutory factors to the instant case,
       we conclude that iBuypower is apparently liable for a $14,000


    4. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to pursuant to Section
       503(b) of the Act and Section 1.80 of the Rules, iBuypower IS hereby
       fourteen thousand dollars ($14,000) for willfully and repeatedly
       violating Sections 302a(b) and 2.803(a)(2) of the Rules.

    5. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to Section 1.80 of the Rules,
       within thirty days of the release date of this Notice of Apparent
       Liability for Forfeiture, iBuypower SHALL PAY the full amount of the
       proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement seeking
       reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.

    6. Payment of the forfeiture must be made by check or similar instrument,
       payable to the order of the Federal Communications Commission.  The
       payment must include the NAL/Acct. No. and FRN No. referenced above.
       Payment by check or money order may be mailed to Federal
       Communications Commission, P.O. Box 358340, Pittsburgh, PA
       15251-8340.  Payment by overnight mail may be sent to Mellon
       Bank /LB 358340, 500 Ross Street, Room 1540670, Pittsburgh, PA
       15251.   Payment by wire transfer may be made to ABA Number 043000261,
       receiving bank Mellon Bank, and account number 911-6106.

    7. The response, if any, must be mailed to the Office of the Secretary,
       Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington,
       D.C. 20554, ATTN: Enforcement Bureau - Spectrum Enforcement Division,
       and must include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the caption.

    8. The Commission will not consider reducing or canceling a forfeiture in
       response to a claim of inability to pay unless the petitioner submits:
       (1) federal tax returns for the most recent three-year period; (2)
       financial statements prepared according to generally accepted
       accounting practices; or (3) some other reliable and objective
       documentation that accurately reflects the petitioner's current
       financial status. Any claim of inability to pay must specifically
       identify the basis for the claim by reference to the financial
       documentation submitted.

    9. Requests for payment of the full amount of the NAL under an
       installment plan should be sent to: Associate Managing Director -
       Financial Operations, 445 12^th Street, S.W., Room 1-A625, Washington,
       D.C. 20554.

   10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Notice of Apparent Liability
       for Forfeiture shall be sent by first class mail and certified mail
       return receipt requested to American Future Technology Corporation
       d/b/a iBuypower, 602 Monterey Pass Road, Monterey Park, California


   Kathryn S. Berthot

   Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division

   Enforcement Bureau

   47 U.S.C. S 302a(b).

   47 C.F.R. S 2.803(a)(2).

   See Letter from Ray LaForge, Chief, Audits and Compliance Branch, Office
   of Engineering and Technology, dated November 29, 2005.

   A Declaration of Conformity is a procedure where the responsible party
   makes measurements or takes other necessary steps to ensure that the
   equipment complies with the appropriate technical standards. 47 C.F.R. S
   2.906(a). Under the Declaration of Conformity procedure, the measurements
   must be made by an FCC-accredited laboratory. 47 C.F.R. S 2.948(a)(3).  In
   addition, a copy of the Declaration of Conformity listing the party
   responsible for compliance must be included in the literature supplied
   with the product. 47 C.F.R. S 2.1077.

   Letter from Kathryn S. Berthot, Deputy Chief, Spectrum Enforcement
   Division, Enforcement Bureau, to iBuypower, Inc. (May 22, 2006).

   Letter from Darren Su, Vice President, American Future Technology
   Corporation dba iBuypower, to Neal McNeil, Federal Communications
   Commission, Enforcement Bureau.

   If a product must be tested and authorized under a DoC, the responsible
   party must ensure that all dissimilar models of the product are authorized
   under a separate DoC. Since iBuypower manufactured and marketed computer
   systems featuring two different processors, the AMD Athlon-64 and
   Athlon-64 X2, it was required to authorize each system under a separate
   DoC. See 47 C.F.R. S 2.1077.

   47 C.F.R. S 15.101. A Class B digital device is defined as one that is
   marketed for use in a residential environment, notwithstanding use in
   commercial, business and industrial environments. See 47 C.F.R. S 15.3(i).

   Section 312(f)(1) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. S 312(f)(1), which applies to
   violations for which forfeitures are assessed under Section 503(b) of the
   Act, provides that "[t]he term `willful,' ... means the conscious and
   deliberate commission or omission of such act, irrespective of any intent
   to violate any provision of this Act or any rule or regulation of the
   Commission authorized by this Act ...." See Southern California
   Broadcasting Co., 6 FCC Rcd 4387 (1991).

   Section 312(f)(2) of the Act provides that "[t]he term `repeated,' ...
   means the commission or omission of such act more than once or, if such
   commission or omission is continuous, for more than one day." 47 U.S.C. S

   47 U.S.C. S 503(b).

   47 U.S.C. S 503(b)(2)(D).

   12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999).

   47 C.F.R. S 1.80.

   See Samson Technologies, Inc., 19 FCC Rcd 4221, 4225 (2004), consent
   decree ordered, 19 FCC Rcd 24542 (2004).

   See 47 C.F.R. S 1.1914.

   Federal Communications Commission DA 06-2497


   Federal Communications Commission DA 06-2497