Koscot Interplanetary, Inc
Volume 91 · 91 F.T.C. 972
Cite this decision
Koscot Interplanetary, Inc, 91 F.T.C. 972 (1978). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v091-0035
Report an error in this record (decision id v091-0035)
Cited by 0 later FTC decisions
Cites
Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)
In THE MATTER OF KOSCOT INTERPLANETARY, INC., ET AL.
Docket 8888. Interlocutory Order, May 16, 1978 Grant of complaint counsel’s motion requesting leave to file an answer to petition for reconsideration.
ORDER GRANTING LEAVE To FILE ANSWER Counsel supporting the complaint in this matter have filed two requests for brief extensions of time within which to file an answer to “Petitions for Reconsideration” filed by respondents Glenn W. Turner and Raleigh P. Mann pursuant to an order entered December 28, 1977 by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Complaint counsel, having received no response to these motions, subsequently filed an “Answer” accompanied by a motion to file the answer “out of time.”
Complaint counsel have apparently assumed that the time established for filing of an answer is governed by Section 3.55 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, pertaining to requests for reconsideration of Commission orders. This section of the Rules requires that petitions for reconsideration be filed within 20 days after service of a Commission order. Thereafter, opposing counsel are given 10 days within which to file an answer. The Commission doubts whether Section 3.55 should properly be applied to the case at hand, because it plainly applies only to requests for reconsideration filed within a short time of the entry of an order, before the matter has left the Commission’s jurisdiction.
Complaint counsel’s position doubtless results from the use by petitioners and the Court of Appeals of the term “reconsideration” to characterize petitioners’ request. Petitioners have also referred to Section 3.55 of the Rules. Assuming arguendo that this section of the Rules has any applicability to the matter at hand, the Commission has determined that the 8 days’ total extension of time requested by complaint counsel is appropriate, given that respondents have had a much longer period of time than that allowed by Section 3.55 of the Rules within which to prepare the petition to which complaint counsel responds. Accordingly, It 1s ordered, That complaint counsel’s motion requesting leave to file an Answer to Respondents’ Petitions for Reconsideration be mma ntad HERBERT R. GIBSON, SR., ET AL. 973 973 . Interlocutory Order