Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version
********************************************************
NOTICE
********************************************************
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 ) File No.: EB-01-MA-035
)
Lightning Electronics, Inc. ) NAL/Acct. No.
200232700002
)
Miami, Florida ) FRN 0006-2915-95
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Adopted: May 10, 2002 Released: May 14, 2002
By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:
1. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order (``Order''), we
cancel a seven thousand dollar ($7,000) Notice of Apparent
Liability for Forfeiture (``NAL'')1 that the Miami Resident Agent
Office issued to Lightning Electronics, Inc. (``Lightning''), for
apparently violating Section 302(b) of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended (``Act'')2 and Section 2.803(a)(1) of the
Commission's Rules (``Rules'').3 The alleged violations involve
Lightning's marketing of non-compliant high-power cordless
telephones.
2. The Commission's Miami, Florida, Resident Agent Office
issued the NAL to Lightning on October 29, 2001. Lightning did
not file a response to the NAL. On February 21, 2002, the Chief,
Enforcement Bureau, issued a Forfeiture Order 4 affirming the
forfeiture proposed by the NAL. On March 8, 2002, Lightning
filed a petition for reconsideration of the Forfeiture Order.5
3. As indicated in the petition for reconsideration,
certain information set forth in the NAL does not pertain to
Lightning. After reviewing the entire record, we find that the
monetary forfeiture should be cancelled. See Section
503(b)(4)(ii) and (iii) of the Act.6
4. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section
504(b) of the Act,7 and Section 1.80(f)(4) of the Rules,8 the
captioned NAL issued to Lightning IS CANCELLED.
5. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 405 of
the Act and Section 1.106 of the Rules, Lightning's petition for
reconsideration IS GRANTED to the extent indicated above and IS
DENIED in all other respects.
6. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall
be sent by Certified Mail -- Return Receipt Requested -- to
Lightning Electronics, Inc., at 231 E. Flagler Street, Unit #1,
Miami, Florida 33131, and to Lightning's attorney, Ira S. Silver,
Esquire, Silver & Silver, 108 S. Miami Avenue, 2nd Floor, Miami,
Florida 33130.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
David H. Solomon
Chief, Enforcement Bureau
_________________________
1Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, NAL/Acct. No.
200232700002 (Enf. Bur., Miami Office, released October 29,
2001).
2 47 U.S.C. § 302a (b).
3 47 C.F.R. § 2.803(a)(1).
4 Lightning Electronics, Inc., 17 FCC Rcd 3131 (Enf. Bur. 2002)
5 Lightning's filing is entitled ``Written Statement Seeking
Reduction or Cancellation of a Proposed Forfeiture.'' We are
treating it as a petition for reconsideration of the Forfeiture
Order pursuant to Section 405 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 405, and
Section 1.106 of the Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.106.
6 47 U.S.C. §§ 503(b)(4)(ii) and (iii).
7 47 U.S.C. § 504(b).
8 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(f)(4).