AT&T to Pay Divestitures to Justice Department
Lawyer Blogs
[##_1L|1263144612.jpg|width="321" height="90" alt=""|_##]The Department of Justice announced today that it has reached a settlement requiring AT&T Inc. (AT&T) to divest assets to address competition concerns in seven markets in Kentucky, Oklahoma, Missouri, Pennsylvania and Texas, including rights to the “Cellular One” brand in order to proceed with its $2.8 billion acquisition of Dobson Communications Corporation (Dobson). The Department said that in certain areas the transaction, as originally proposed, would have resulted in higher prices, lower quality, and diminished investment in network improvements, and would have substantially lessened competition to the detriment of consumers of mobile wireless telecommunications services.
The Department’s Antitrust Division filed a civil lawsuit today in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to block the proposed transaction. At the same time, the Department filed a proposed consent decree that, if approved by the court, would resolve the Department’s competitive concerns and the lawsuit.
“The required divestitures will preserve competition for residents in rural areas in Kentucky, Oklahoma, Missouri, Pennsylvania and Texas and ensure that these consumers continue to enjoy the benefits of competition, such as lower prices, and higher quality,” said Thomas O. Barnett, Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Department’s Antitrust Division.
The transaction is also subject to review by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The Department has coordinated with the FCC throughout its investigation.
The divestitures are required to assure continued competition in markets where the merger would otherwise result in a significant loss of competition. In three rural service areas (RSAs) in Kentucky and Oklahoma, AT&T and Dobson each hold one of the two cellular licenses and are the most significant competitors. In two RSAs in Missouri and Texas, AT&T has a minority equity interest in, and important control rights over, the primary wireless competitor to Dobson. According to the complaint, the proposed transaction would substantially reduce competition for mobile wireless telecommunications services in these five markets where the businesses wholly or partially owned by Dobson and AT&T collectively serve more than 60 percent of subscribers. The proposed divestitures remedy the competitive problem caused by the otherwise overlapping ownership.
Similarly, the divestiture of the Cellular One brand and associated rights will ensure continued competition in two markets in Pennsylvania and Texas where a Cellular One licensee is the primary wireless competitor to AT&T. Without the divestiture, AT&T would have had the incentive and ability to harm competition by limiting and eliminating the Cellular One licensee’s ability to use the brand effectively.
AT&T is the largest mobile wireless telecommunications services provider in the United States, measured by subscribers, offering service to more than 63 million subscribers in 50 states. In 2006, AT&T earned revenues of approximately $37.5 billion in revenues from its mobile wireless telecommunication services. Dobson is the ninth largest mobile wireless telecommunications services provider to approximately 1.7 million subscribers in the United States, offering service in 17 states. In 2006, Dobson earned approximately $1.3 billion in revenues. Dobson also owns Cellular One Properties LLC, which licenses the Cellular One brand and promotes the Cellular One service market and related trademarks, service marks and designs.
Related listings
-
Judge Refuses To Block Moment Of Silence, For Now
Lawyer Blogs 10/29/2007[##_1L|1393034875.jpg|width="180" height="128" alt=""|_##]An atheist who's challenging a new state law that mandates a moment of silence in Illinois schools before the start of each school day has lost his first battle but,is still waging his war. Th...
-
Supreme Court to review Exxon Valdez award
Lawyer Blogs 10/29/2007[##_1L|1021682221.jpg|width="130" height="93" alt=""|_##]The Supreme Court will decide whether a $2.5 billion punitive damages award against Exxon Corp. -- now Exxon Mobil -- for its role in the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska was excessive. Th...
-
NHPD narcotics cop pleads guilty
Lawyer Blogs 10/29/2007[##_1L|1245082673.jpg|width="120" height="101" alt=""|_##]Former New Haven Police Department Lt. William “Billy” White, who headed the department’s narcotics unit for more than a decade, pleaded guilty Friday to conspiracy to commit bribery and theft...
Illinois Work Injury Lawyers – Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD.
Accidents in the workplace are often caused by unsafe work conditions arising from ignoring safety rules, overlooking maintenance or other negligence of those in management. While we are one of the largest firms in Illinois dedicated solely to the representation of injured workers, we pride ourselves on the personal, one-on-one approach we deliver to each client.
Work accidents can cause serious injuries and sometimes permanent damage. Some extremely serious work injuries can permanently hinder a person’s ability to get around and continue their daily duties. Factors that affect one’s quality of life such as place of work, relationships with friends and family, and social standing can all be taken away quickly by a work injury. Although, you may not be able to recover all of your losses, you may be entitled to compensation as a result of your work injury. Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD. provides informed advocacy in all kinds of workers’ compensation claims, including:
• Injuries to the back and neck, including severe spinal cord injuries
• Serious head injuries
• Heart problems resulting from workplace activities
• Injuries to the knees, elbows, shoulders and other joints
• Injuries caused by repetitive movements
For Illinois Workers’ Compensation claims, you will ALWAYS cheat yourself if you do not hire an experienced attorney. When you hire Krol, Bongiorno & Given, Ltd, you will have someone to guide you through the process, and when it is time to settle, we will add value to your case IN EXCESS of our fee. In the last few years, employers and insurance carriers have sought to advance the argument that when you settle a case without an attorney, your already low settlement should be further reduced by 20% so that you do not get a “windfall.” Representing yourself in Illinois is a lose-lose proposition.