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.


   January 15, 2008



   AND FACSIMILE AT (801) 437-1714

   Mr. James Royer


   Absolute Toy Marketing, Inc.,


   1053 South 1675 West

   Orem, UT 84058

   Re: File No. EB-07-SE-250

   Dear Mr. Royer:

   This is an official CITATION, issued pursuant to section 503(b)(5) of the
   Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act"), 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(5),
   for marketing unauthorized radio frequency devices in the United States in
   violation of section 302(b) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. S: 302a(b), and section
   2.803 of the Commission's rules ("rules"), 47 C.F.R. S: 2.803. In
   addition, you have failed to respond to directives of the Enforcement
   Bureau to provide certain information and documents. As explained below,
   future violations of these rules may subject Absolute Toy Marketing, Inc.
   to monetary forfeitures.

   After receiving a complaint, the Spectrum Enforcement Division
   ("Division") of the Enforcement Bureau began an investigation to determine
   whether was marketing unauthorized FM transmitters in the
   United States. On October 12, 2007, and again on October 18, 2007,
   Division personnel observed that the website advertised the
   sale of assembled FM broadcast transmitters, including models identified
   on the website as R-FM30B-WT, R-FM100B-WT, and UX-150, which did not
   appear to hold grants of equipment authorization from the Commission. As
   part of the investigation, the Division sent a letter of inquiry ("LOI")
   to on October 22, 2007, requesting, inter alia, a copy of
   the grant of equipment authorization corresponding to each model of FM
   transmitter marketed by This LOI also made note of the
   Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture that had previously been
   issued against Gibson Tech Ed Inc., d/b/a for willful and
   repeated violation of this same marketing rule.

   On November 15, 2007, you responded to our LOI as President of Absolute
   Toy Marketing, Inc., d/b/a ("Absolute"). Your response was
   not supported by an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury, as
   directed by our LOI. You advised that Absolute became the owner of the
   website at a public auction in April 2006. You stated that
   Absolute sells electronic kits made in Canada by CanaKit Corporation and
   transmitters made in the United States by Ramsey Electronics, Inc. You
   stated that some kits sold on your website have been assembled for export,
   and you asserted your belief that these items may be lawfully marketed
   because your customers are required to fill out a form on which they state
   that they will export the device. You stated that this export form had
   previously been "provided to the FCC with no reply." You expressed your
   assumption that the form was therefore acceptable. You chose not to answer
   several questions that addressed the core of this investigation. Instead,
   you asked that we address a new letter to you if your response did not
   answer our initial questions.

   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)(1) of the rules

   [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 subject to
   certification, such device has been authorized by the Commission in
   accordance with the rules in this chapter and is properly identified and
   labeled as required by S: 2.925 and other relevant sections in this

   Section 15.201(b) of the rules provides that radio frequency devices, such
   as the FM transmitters at issue, are subject to certification.
   Specifically, this rule provides, "intentional radiators operating under
   the provisions of this part shall be certificated by the
   Commission...prior to the initiation of marketing."

   Absolute acknowledged that it has controlled the website
   since April 2006. Our investigation confirmed that Absolute has marketed
   several FM broadcast transmitters, including models identified on its website as R-FM30B-WT, R-FM100B-WT, and UX-150, which have
   not been certificated and thus are not authorized by the Commission.
   Accordingly, it appears that Absolute has violated section 302(b) of the
   Act and section 2.803(a) of the rules by marketing unauthorized
   radiofrequency devices in the United States. Furthermore, Absolute
   apparently violated Commission orders by failing to answer material
   questions of the LOI and failing to support its response with an affidavit
   or declaration, signed under penalty of perjury, which responds to
   Enforcement Bureau directives to provide certain information and

   A party may not ignore the directives in a Bureau inquiry letter. You are
   again ordered, pursuant to Sections 4(i), 4(j), and 403 of the Act, to
   provide the information sought by our October 22, 2007 LOI. You must
   provide this information in the manner indicated therein within 20 days of
   the date of this citation.

   If, after receipt of this citation, Absolute violates the Communications
   Act or the Commission's rules in any manner described herein, the
   Commission may impose monetary forfeitures not to exceed $11,000 for each
   such violation or each day of a continuing violation.

   If you choose to do so, you may respond to this citation within 30 days
   from the date of this letter either through (1) a personal interview at
   the Commission's Field Office nearest to your place of business, or (2) a
   written statement. Your response should specify the actions that Absolute
   is taking to ensure that it does not violate the Commission's rules
   governing the marketing and importation of radiofrequency devices in the

   The nearest Commission field office is the Denver Field Office. Please
   call Kevin M. Pittman at 202-418-1427 if you wish to schedule a personal
   interview. You should schedule any interview to take place within 30 days
   of the date of this letter. You should send any written statement within
   30 days of the date of this letter to:

   Kathryn S. Berthot

   Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division

   Enforcement Bureau

   Federal Communications Commission

   445-12th Street, S.W., Rm. 3-C366

   Washington, D.C. 20554

   Under the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. S: 552(a)(e)(3), we are informing
   you that the Commission's staff will use all relevant material information
   before it, including information that you disclose in your interview or
   written statement, to determine what, if any, enforcement action is
   required to ensure your compliance with the Communications Act and the
   Commission's rules.

   The knowing and willful making of any false statement, or the concealment
   of any material fact, in reply to this citation is punishable by fine or
   imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. S: 1001.

   Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation.


   Kathryn S. Berthot

   Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division

   Enforcement Bureau


   A "radiofrequency device" is defined as "any device which in its operation
   is capable of emitting radio frequency energy by radiation, conduction, or
   other means." 47 C.F.R. S: 2.801.

   See Letter from Kathryn S. Berthot, Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division,
   Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, to Monique Gibson,
   Registered Agent, (October 22, 2007) ("LOI").

   See Gibson Tech Ed., Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 20
   FCC Rcd 14438 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div., 2005) (finding Gibson Tech
   Ed, Inc., d/b/a apparently liable for marketing unauthorized
   FM broadcast transmitters in violation of 47 C.F.R. S: 2.803(a)),
   forfeiture ordered, 21 FCC Rcd 2915 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div., 2006),
   recon. denied, 21 FCC Rcd 9642 (Enf. Bur. 2006) ("Gibson Tech").

   See Letter from Jim Royer, President, Absolute Toy Marketing, Inc., d/b/a, to Kevin M. Pittman, Spectrum Enforcement Division,
   Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission (November 15, 2007)
   ("Letter from Jim Royer, November 15, 2007"). Though this letter is
   undated, the envelope shows a November 15, 2007 postmark.

   See id. Previously Gibson Tech Ed., Inc., d/b/a owned and
   operated the website.

   See id.; see also Ramsey Electronics, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability
   for Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 458 (Enf. Bur. 2006) (issuing a Notice of
   Apparent Liability against the manufacturer for its marketing of
   unauthorized FM transmitter models FM35WT and FM100BWT).

   See Letter from Jim Royer, November 15, 2007.

   Id. A sample of the form to which you refer was first obtained by Division
   personnel during the 2004 investigation of Gibson Tech Ed., Inc., d/b/a for the identical violation of 47 C.F.R. S: 2.803(a). In
   fact, on two occasions during the 2004 enforcement action, the Commission
   expressly stated the effect of this form on the company's liability. See 
   Gibson Tech, 21 FCC Rcd at 9644 ("Accordingly, the `export agreement'
   Gibson asks its customers to sign does not relieve Gibson of liability for
   marketing unlicensed transmitters."); 20 FCC Rcd at 14440 P: 8 ("Gibson's
   use of the `FM Transmitter Certification Form' appears to be an attempt to
   circumvent the prohibition on marketing of unapproved radio frequency
   devices such as the R-FM25B-WT and R-FM100B-WT.").

   See Letter from Jim Royer, November 15, 2007. The Commission also
   previously addressed your assumption. See Gibson Tech, 21 FCC Rcd at 9644
   n.22 ("To the extent that Gibson suggests the Commission acquiesced in
   this attempt to circumvent the Commission's rules, we note that the
   Commission is not required to develop corporate plans for Rule compliance
   by individual retail outlets.") (citations omitted). Our records indicate
   your familiarity with the 2004 investigation of Gibson Tech Ed., Inc. due
   to your involvement on their behalf. See Letter from Jim Royer to Brian
   Butler, Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal
   Communications Commission (June 22, 2004).

   See Letter from Jim Royer, November 15, 2007.

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

   47 C.F.R. S: 2.803(a)(1).

   47 C.F.R. S: 15.201(b).

   See, e.g., SBC Communications, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC Rcd 7589,
   7591 (2002). In SBC Communications, Inc., the Commission imposed a
   $100,000 forfeiture against a carrier for its willful refusal to supply a
   sworn declaration in response to an Enforcement Bureau letter of inquiry.
   The Commission stated, "[T]he order here was squarely within the
   Commission's authority and, in any event, parties are required to comply
   with Commission orders even if they believe them to be outside the
   Commission's authority." Id. at 7591.

   See 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(b)(3).

   Federal Communications Commission DA 08-74


   Federal Communications Commission DA 08-74


                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554