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-07-TC-2005
Extreme Leads, Inc. ) NAL/Acct. No. 200732170067
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture ) FRN: 0016769630
)
)
)
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE
Adopted: July 30, 2007 Released: July 31, 2007
By the Commission:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture ("NAL"), we find
that Extreme Leads, Inc. ("Extreme Leads") apparently willfully or
repeatedly violated section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended ("Act"), and the Commission's related rules and orders, by
delivering at least 218 unsolicited advertisements to the telephone
facsimile machines of at least 132 consumers. Based on the facts and
circumstances surrounding these apparent violations, we find that
Extreme Leads is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of
$1,377,000.
II. BACKGROUND
2. Section 227(b)(1)(C) of the Act makes it "unlawful for any person
within the United States, or any person outside the United States if
the recipient is within the United States . . . to use any telephone
facsimile machine, computer, or other device to send, to a telephone
facsimile machine, an unsolicited advertisement." The term
"unsolicited advertisement" is defined in the Act and the Commission's
rules as "any material advertising the commercial availability or
quality of any property, goods, or services which is transmitted to
any person without that person's prior express invitation or
permission in writing or otherwise." Under the Commission's Rules,
there is an "established business relationship" exception that permits
a party to deliver a message to a consumer if the sender has an
established business relationship with the recipient and the sender
obtained the number of the facsimile machine through the voluntary
communication by the recipient, directly to the sender, within the
context of the established business relationship, or through a
directory, advertisement, or a site on the Internet to which the
recipient voluntarily agreed to make available its facsimile number
for public distribution.
3. On June 14, 2006, in response to one or more consumer complaints
alleging that Extreme Leads had faxed unsolicited advertisements, the
Commission staff issued a citation to Extreme Leads, pursuant to
section 503(b)(5) of the Act. The staff cited Extreme Leads for using
a telephone facsimile machine, computer, or other device, to send
unsolicited advertisements to a telephone facsimile machine, in
violation of section 227 of the Act and the Commission's related rules
and orders. The citation, which the staff served by certified mail,
return receipt requested, warned Extreme Leads that subsequent
violations could result in the imposition of monetary forfeitures of
up to $11,000 per violation, and included a copy of the consumer
complaints that formed the basis of the citation. The citation
informed Extreme Leads that within 30 days of the date of the
citation, it could either request an interview with Commission staff,
or could provide a written statement responding to the citation.
Extreme Leads did not request an interview or otherwise respond to
the citation.
4. Despite the citation's warning that subsequent violations could
result in the imposition of monetary forfeitures, we have received 147
additional consumer complaints indicating that Extreme Leads continued
to engage in such conduct after receiving the citation. We base our
action here specifically on complaints filed by 132 consumers
establishing that Extreme Leads continued to send 218 unsolicited
advertisements to telephone facsimile machines after the date of the
citation.
5. Section 503(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to assess a
forfeiture of up to $11,000 for each violation of the Act or of any
rule, regulation, or order issued by the Commission under the Act by a
non-common carrier or other entity not specifically designated in
section 503 of the Act. In exercising such authority, we are 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 require."
III. DISCUSSION
A. Violations of the Commission's Rules Restricting Unsolicited Facsimile
Advertisements
6. We find that Extreme Leads apparently violated section 227 of the Act
and the Commission's related rules and orders by using a telephone
facsimile machine, computer, or other device to send at least 218
unsolicited advertisements to the 132 consumers identified in the
Appendix. This NAL is based on evidence that these consumers received
unsolicited fax advertisements from Extreme Leads after the Bureau's
citation. The facsimile transmissions advertise mortgage services and
other financial services. Further, according to the complaints, the
consumers neither had an established business relationship with
Extreme Leads nor gave Extreme Leads permission to send the facsimile
transmissions. The faxes at issue here therefore fall within the
definition of an "unsolicited advertisement." Based on the entire
record, including the consumer complaints, we conclude that Extreme
Leads apparently violated section 227 of the Act and the Commission's
related rules and orders by sending 218 unsolicited advertisements to
132 consumers' facsimile machines.
B. Proposed Forfeiture
7. We find that Extreme Leads is apparently liable for a forfeiture in
the amount of $1,377,000. Although the Commission's Forfeiture Policy
Statement does not establish a base forfeiture amount for violating
the prohibition against using a telephone facsimile machine to send
unsolicited advertisements, the Commission has previously considered
$4,500 per unsolicited fax advertisement to be an appropriate base
amount. We apply that base amount to each of 146 of the apparent
violations. In addition, where the consumer requests the company to
stop sending facsimile messages, and the company continues to send
them, the Commission has previously considered $10,000 per unsolicited
fax advertisement the appropriate forfeiture for violations associated
with such egregious behavior. Here, 38 consumers specifically
requested that Extreme Leads cease sending facsimiles. Notwithstanding
these requests, an additional 56 facsimiles were sent to these
consumers. In nine instances, consumers were unable to request that
the company refrain from sending additional unsolicited facsimiles
because the telephone number provided by Extreme Leads specifically
for removal requests was either invalid, disconnected, or otherwise
did not work. These consumers received 16 facsimiles. We find such
behavior justifies a forfeiture amount higher than the base amount
because it circumvents consumer attempts to request that the company
stop sending facsimile messages. We believe that assessing a higher
forfeiture amount is warranted based on the nature and gravity of the
violations and the continued need to ensure compliance with section
227 of the Act and the Commission's rules and orders. Accordingly, we
apply the $10,000 amount to each of these 72 apparent violations where
the consumer requested or attempted to request that Extreme Leads
discontinue its faxing. Thus, a total forfeiture of $1,377,000 is
proposed. Extreme Leads will have the opportunity to submit evidence
and arguments in response to this NAL to show that no forfeiture
should be imposed or that some lesser amount should be assessed.
IV. CONCLUSION AND ORDERING CLAUSES
8. We have determined that Extreme Leads, Inc. apparently violated
section 227 of the Act and the Commission's related rules and orders
by using a telephone facsimile machine, computer, or other device to
send at least 218 unsolicited advertisements to the 132 consumers
identified in the Appendix. We have further determined that Extreme
Leads, Inc. is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of
$1,377,000.
9. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to section 503(b) of the Act, 47
U.S.C. S: 503(b), and section 1.80 of the Rules, 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80,
that Extreme Leads, Inc. is hereby NOTIFIED of this APPARENT LIABILITY
FOR A FORFEITURE in the amount of $1,377,000 for willful or repeated
violations of section 227(b)(1)(C) of the Communications Act, 47
U.S.C. S: 227(b)(1)(C), sections 64.1200(a)(3) of the Commission's
rules, 47 C.F.R. S: 64.1200(a)(3), and the related orders described in
the paragraphs above.
10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to section 1.80 of the
Commission's rules, within thirty (30) days of the release date of
this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, Extreme Leads, Inc.
SHALL PAY the full amount of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a
written statement seeking reduction or cancellation of the proposed
forfeiture.
11. Payment by check or money order, payable to the order of the "Federal
Communications Commission," may be mailed to Forfeiture Collection
Section, Finance Branch, Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box
358340, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. Payment by overnight mail may be sent to
Mellon Client Service Center, 500 Ross Street, Room 670, Pittsburgh,
PA 15262-0001, Attn: FCC Module Supervisor. Payment by wire transfer
may be made to: ABA Number 043000261, receiving bank Mellon Bank, and
account number 911-6229. The payment should note NAL/Acct. No.
200732170067.
12. The response, if any, must be mailed both to the Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20554, ATTN: Enforcement Bureau - Telecommunications
Consumers Division, and to Colleen Heitkamp, Chief, Telecommunications
Consumers Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554, and must
include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the caption.
13. 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.
14. Requests for payment of the full amount of this Notice of Apparent
Liability for Forfeiture under an installment plan should be sent to:
Chief, Revenue and Receivables Operations Group, 445 12th Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20554.
15. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Notice of Apparent Liability
for Forfeiture shall be sent by Certified Mail Return Receipt
Requested to Extreme Leads, Inc., Attention: Marc Carlson, Nick
Mancino and Steve Anderson, 3346 Auburn Rd, Auburn Hills, MI
48326-3310 and 6001 N. Adams Rd, Ste 103, Bloomfield Hills, MI
48304-1575.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
APPENDIX
Complainant sent facsimile solicitations Violation Date(s)
Alfred K. Kornel 10/3/2006
Allen Hart 9/21/2006
Allen S. Greene 8/9/2006
Allen S. Greene 8/10/2006
Allen S. Greene 8/30/2006
Allen S. Greene 9/5/2006
Allen S. Greene 9/11/2006
Allen S. Greene 9/20/2006
Allen S. Greene 10/3/2006
Allen S. Greene 10/12/2006
Allyn Taylor 10/3/2006
Anthony J. Papania 10/31/2006
Ben J. Hofmeister 8/17/2006
Ben J. Hofmeister 8/23/2006
Ben J. Hofmeister 8/30/2006
Berry & Rita Shelton 9/13/2006
Bob Mitchell 10/2/2006
Bob Pianka 8/2/2006
Burt Hoffman 7/31/2006
Burt Hoffman 8/2/2006
Cecilia Elguera 10/19/2006
David A. Hawkins 10/31/2006
David A. Hawkins 11/8/2006
David G Kanter 9/19/2006
David Gamble 10/11/2006
David L. Everson 8/28/2006
David L. Everson 9/7/2006
David Solinske 8/1/2006
David Solinske 8/15/2006
David Wisniewski 9/11/2006
Dawn D Colwell 7/31/2006
Donald E. Cullman 8/24/2006
Donald F. Vogt 11/7/2006
Eleanor Robbins 8/2/2006
Eleanor Robbins 8/7/2006
Frank Chickey 8/17/2006
Frank Chickey 8/31/2006
Franklin D. Self 9/11/2006
Geoffrey L. Denempont 8/2/2006
George Welles 8/3/2006
Glen L. Kapitawovich 8/7/2006
Graham Ginsberg 8/9/2006
Gwendolyn Warrick 8/16/2006
Jaime Lewis 8/1/2006
James L. Goines 8/2/2006
Jason P. Sheaffer 7/31/2006
Jerrold Feigenbaum 9/21/2006
Jerrold Feigenbaum 9/25/2006
Jerrold Feigenbaum 9/26/2006
Jerrold Feigenbaum 9/27/2006
Jerrold Feigenbaum 10/2/2006
Jerrold Feigenbaum 10/3/2006
Jerry Mandel 9/5/2006
Jessyca L. Howell 9/13/2006-9/27/2006
Jessyca L. Howell 9/13/2006-9/27/2006
Jessyca L. Howell 9/13/2006-9/27/2006
Jim Pelletier 10/10/2006
Jim Pelletier 10/18/2006
Joanne M. Carbana 8/23/2006
Joe Carson 8/3/2006
Joe Carson 9/14/2006
John Alexander 9/13/2006
Jon Roberts 8/16/2006
Jon Roberts 8/17/2006
Jonathan Bernon 8/16/2006
Jonathan Bernon 8/22/2006
Jonathan Bernon 8/22/2006
Jonathan Bernon 8/29/2006
Jonathan Bernon 9/7/2006
Joseph Blumenthal 8/1/2006
Julia B. Norman 10/5/2006
Julia B. Norman 10/11/2006
Kathryn L. Nelson 8/16/2006
Kathryn L. Nelson 8/18/2006
Kathryn L. Nelson 8/21/2006
Kathryn L. Nelson 8/30/2006
Kathryn L. Nelson 9/11/2006
Kathryn L. Nelson 9/21/2006
Kathryn L. Nelson 9/26/2006
Kenny Stewart 10/19/2006
Kristen A. Henderson 8/1/2006
Laura Lillie 10/10/2006
Linda B Evans 8/15/2006
Linda Brown 10/2/2006
Linda Edelmann 9/28/2006
Linda Edelmann 10/3/2006
Linda Edelmann 10/5/2006
Linda Edelmann 10/24/2006
Linda Edelmann 11/7/2006
M R Terelmes 8/10/2006
Mark D. Roberts 10/16/2006
Mark D. Roberts 10/25/2006
Mark Kotyuk 10/5/2006
Mary Johnson 9/21/2006
Mary Johnson 9/25/2006
Mary Johnson 9/26/2006
Mary Johnson 9/27/2006
Mary Johnson 9/27/2006
Megan Seaborn 8/21/2006
Melvin Freund 10/30/2006
Melvin Freund 11/1/2006
Michael D. Bloom 10/9/2006
Nancy E. Bockstael 8/24/2006
Nancy E. Bockstael 9/6/2006
Nancy E. Bockstael 9/18/2006
Nancy Miller Springman 10/17/2006
Nancy Overson 9/5/2006
Nicole McMahan 8/10/2006
Nicole McMahan 10/18/2006
Paul K Hemmer 8/17/2006
Rhonda Stuteman 10/23/2006
Rich Heinrich 9/26/2006
Richard C. Lambert 9/26/2006
Richard Holloway 10/9/06
Richard M. Lucas 8/2/2006
Richard M. Lucas 8/8/2006
Richard M. Lucas 10/16/2006
Rita M. Gloner 8/21/2006
Rita M. Gloner 8/23/2006
Robert A. Cosgrove 10/26/2006
Robert A. Cosgrove 10/31/2006
Robert C Bigrigg 8/16/2006
Robert C Bigrigg 8/24/2006
Robert L King 8/21/2006
Robert Mahoney 8/17/2006
Robert T Evans 8/2/2006
Robert T. Plumb 9/13/2006
Ron Kielb 8/21/2006
Ronald Pearlman 8/17/2006
Russell Owen 10/3/2006
Russell Owen 10/3/2006
S. John Chander 8/10/2006
S. John Chander 8/14/2006
Sandra S. Bockes 10/12/2006
Sandra S. Bockes 10/30/2006
Santo Casella 8/22/2006
Stephen Guss 8/28/2006
Steven L Turco 8/28/2006
Sulu Demirpolat 8/22/2006
Susan Knopfle 8/31/2006
Susan Knopfle 9/7/2006
Suzanne M. Ishi 8/28/2006
Thomas G. Kamp 9/25/2006
Thomas Hennessey 8/2/2006
Van Wood 10/26/2006
William J. Coulston 9/26/2006
Complainant sent facsimile solicitations after Violation Date(s)
requesting no more be sent
Alicia C. Underwood-Zollar 8/24/2006
Bradley D. Roth 8/23/2006
David L. Patton 9/26/2006
Delight C. Brown 10/3/2006
Diana C. Bolivar 8/2006
Eileen Mouly 9/5/2006
Eileen Mouly 9/27/2006
Eleanor Robbins 8/8/2006
Evelyn Berg 8/1/2006
Evelyn Giso 9/13/2006
Fatmi Anders 7/31/2006
Fatmi Anders 8/2/2006
Fatmi Anders 8/31/2006
Fatmi Anders 9/7/2006
Fatmi Anders 9/20/2006
Fatmi Anders 10/3/2006
Geoffrey L. Denempont 8/7/2006
Glen L. Kapitawovich 9/26/2006
Glen L. Kapitawovich 10/4/2006
Glen L. Kapitawovich 10/5/2006
Harold B. Smith 10/11/2006
James Robert Myers, Jr. 10/23/2006
James T. Valley 8/30/2006
Jeni K. Manago 8/2/2006
Jeni K. Manago 8/9/2006
Jeremy Dealke 9/13/2006
Jill B. Grossman 9/28/2006
Jill B. Grossman 9/27/2006
Jim P. Willingham 9/11/2006
John Fulford 9/6/2006
Kandie Press 9/20/2006
Karen L. Bays 8/28/2006
Linda C. Wierbza 7/31/2006
Linda C. Wierbza 8/2/2006
Luanne M. O'Keefe 8/29/2006
Mark M. Warner 11/9/2006
Mark M. Warner 11/9/2006
Mike Witkowski 9/26/2006
Nancy Sweetman 8/30/2006
Natural Resources Consulting, Inc 8/2/2006
Natural Resources Consulting, Inc 8/3/2006
Natural Resources Consulting, Inc 8/8/2006
Natural Resources Consulting, Inc 8/28/2006
Oshunrire Naomi O James 8/31/2006
Oshunrire Naomi O James 9/11/2006
Pedro F. Mora 9/20/2006
Ramesh Keswani 10/26/2006
Richard Braunstein 8/28/2006
Richard Braunstein 9/6/2006
Robert Steele 10/2/2006
Roger Easterling 10/2/2006
Roy G. Saltman 7/31/2006
Stephen Antisdel 8/22/2006
Stephen Antisdel 10/2/2006
Tiffany Keller 8/21/2006
William H. Seigel 10/23/2006
Complainant actively attempted to request that no Violation Date(s)
more facsimile solicitations be sent
Allan Lippman 8/31/2006
Dale I. Meyer 9/6/2006
Gwyn Reed 9/13/2006
Howard M. Greene 7/31/2006
Howard M. Greene 8/1/2006
Joan A. Pope 10/12/2006
John E Turner 9/11/2006
John E Turner 9/18/2006
Mark E. Logan 8/1/2006
Pamela E. Morrell 8/23/2006
Pamela E. Morrell 9/7/2006
Phillip W. Watson 8/17/2006
Phillip W. Watson 8/24/2006
Phillip W. Watson 8/28/2006
Phillip W. Watson 8/31/2006
Phillip W. Watson 9/14/2006
See 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(1). The Commission has the authority under this
section of the Act to assess a forfeiture against any person who has
"willfully or repeatedly failed to comply with any of the provisions of
this Act or of any rule, regulation, or order issued by the Commission
under this Act ...." See also 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(5) (stating that the
Commission has the authority under this section of the Act to assess a
forfeiture penalty against any person who does not hold a license, permit,
certificate or other authorization issued by the Commission or an
applicant for any of those listed instrumentalities so long as such person
(A) is first issued a citation of the violation charged; (B) is given a
reasonable opportunity for a personal interview with an official of the
Commission, at the field office of the Commission nearest to the person's
place of residence; and (C) subsequently engages in conduct of the type
described in the citation).
According to publicly available information, Extreme Leads is also doing
business as ELI, Inc. ("ELI"). Therefore, all references in this NAL to
"Extreme Leads" encompass Extreme Leads as well as ELI. Extreme Leads has
offices at 3346 Auburn Rd, Auburn Hills, MI 48326-3310 and 6001 N. Adams
Rd, Ste 103, Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-1575. Marc Carlson, Nick Mancino
and Steve Anderson are listed as contact persons for Extreme Leads.
Accordingly, all references in this NAL to "Extreme Leads" also encompass
the foregoing individuals and all other principals and officers of this
entity, as well as the corporate entity itself.
See 47 U.S.C. S: 227(b)(1)(C); 47 C.F.R. S: 64.1200(a)(3); see also
Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
of 1991, Report and Order and Third Order on Reconsideration, 21 FCC Rcd
3787 (2006).
47 U.S.C. S: 227(b)(1)(C); 47 C.F.R. S: 64.1200(a)(3).
47 U.S.C. S:227(a)(4); 47 C.F.R. S:64.1200 (f)(13).
An "established business relationship" is defined as a prior or existing
relationship formed by a voluntary two-way communication "with or without
an exchange of consideration, on the basis of an inquiry, application,
purchase or transaction by the business or residential subscriber
regarding products or services offered by such person or entity, which
relationship has not been previously terminated by either party." 47
C.F.R. S: 64.1200(f)(5).
See 47 U.S.C. S: 227(b)(1)(C); 47 C.F.R. S: 64 (a)(3)(i), (ii).
Citation from Kurt A. Schroeder, Deputy Chief, Telecommunications
Consumers Division, Enforcement Bureau, File No. EB-06-TC-117, issued to
Extreme Leads on June 14, 2006.
See 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(5) (authorizing the Commission to issue citations
to persons who do not hold a license, permit, certificate or other
authorization issued by the Commission or an applicant for any of those
listed instrumentalities for violations of the Act or of the Commission's
rules and orders).
Commission staff mailed the citation to ELI, Inc., a.k.a. Extreme Leads,
Inc., Attn. Jeffrey Wilson, 3346 Auburn Road, P.O. Box 334, Auburn Hills,
MI 48326; Extreme Leads, Inc., Attn. Jeffrey Wilson, 6001 N Adams Rd,
Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304; and Extreme Leads, Inc., Attn. Jeffrey Wilson,
30750 Tanglewood Drive, Novi, MI 48377. See n.2, supra.
See Appendix for a listing of the consumer complaints against Extreme
Leads requesting Commission action.
We note that evidence of additional instances of unlawful conduct by
Extreme Leads may form the basis of subsequent enforcement action.
Section 503(b)(2)(C) provides for forfeitures up to $10,000 for each
violation in cases not covered by subparagraph (A) or (B), which address
forfeitures for violations by licensees and common carriers, among others.
See 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b). In accordance with the inflation adjustment
requirements contained in the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996,
Pub. L. 104-134, Sec. 31001, 110 Stat. 1321, the Commission implemented an
increase of the maximum statutory forfeiture under section 503(b)(2)(C) to
$11,000. See 47 C.F.R. S:1.80(b)(3); Amendment of Section 1.80 of the
Commission's Rules and Adjustment of Forfeiture Maxima to Reflect
Inflation, 15 FCC Rcd 18221 (2000); see also Amendment of Section 1.80(b)
of the Commission's Rules and Adjustment of Forfeiture Maxima to Reflect
Inflation, 19 FCC Rcd 10945 (2004) (this recent amendment of section
1.80(b) to reflect inflation left the forfeiture maximum for this type of
violator at $11,000).
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(2)(D); The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement
and Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture
Guidelines, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 17087, 17100-01 para. 27 (1997)
(Forfeiture Policy Statement), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999).
See, e.g., complaints dated October 30, 2006 and November 1, 2006, from
Melvin Freund. All of the complainants involved in this action are listed
in the Appendix below.
See 47 U.S.C. S: 227(a)(4); 47 C.F.R. S: 64.1200(f)(13) (definition
previously at S: 64.1200(f)(10)).
See Get-Aways, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability For Forfeiture, 15 FCC
Rcd 1805 (1999); Get-Aways, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 15 FCC Rcd 4843
(2000); see also US Notary, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for
Forfeiture, 15 Rcd 16999 (2000); US Notary, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 16 FCC
Rcd 18398 (2001); Tri-Star Marketing, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability
For Forfeiture, 15 FCC Rcd 11295 (2000); Tri-Star Marketing, Inc.,
Forfeiture Order, 15 FCC Rcd 23198 (2000).
See Carolina Liquidators, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for
Forfeiture, 15 FCC 16,837, 16,842 (2000); 21st Century Fax(es) Ltd., AKA
20th Century Fax(es), Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 15 FCC
Rcd 24,406, 24,411 (2000).
See, e.g., complaint dated August 1, 2006, from Howard M. Greene (stating
that calling the opt-out number resulted in a recording indicating that
the "the number is not in service."); complaint dated September 18, 2006,
from John E. Turner (stating that "neither [removal] number connected to
anything"); complaint dated September 26, 2006, from Gwyn Reed (stating
that calling the fax removal number resulted in the following voice
message recording: "52-4. Number is invalid or number has been blocked
you're your area code."); complaint received September 25, 2006, from Dale
I. Meyer (stating that all "stop" numbers are "disconnected or
non-working."); complaint received October 23, 2006, from Phillip W.
Watson (stating that "[o]f the 5 different opt-out numbers on these faxes,
none worked for me."). The complainants involved in these actions are
listed in the Appendix below.
See 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(4)(C); 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(f)(3).
47 C.F.R. S: 1.80.
47 C.F.R. S: 1.1914.
(...continued from previous page)
(continued....)
Federal Communications Commission FCC 07-131
1
2
Federal Communications Commission FCC 07-131