16 C.F.R. § 1.1

Policy

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Any person, partnership, or corporation may request advice from the Commission with respect to a course of action which the requesting party proposes to pursue. The Commission will consider such requests for advice and inform the requesting party of the Commission's views, where practicable, under the following circumstances.

(1) The matter involves a substantial or novel question of fact or law and there is no clear Commission or court precedent; or

(2) The subject matter of the request and consequent publication of Commission advice is of significant public interest.

(b) The Commission has authorized its staff to consider all requests for advice and to render advice, where practicable, in those circumstances in which a Commission opinion would not be warranted. Hypothetical questions will not be answered, and a request for advice will ordinarily be considered inappropriate where:

(1) The same or substantially the same course of action is under investigation or is or has been the subject of a current proceeding involving the Commission or another governmental agency, or

(2) An informed opinion cannot be made or could be made only after extensive investigation, clinical study, testing, or collateral inquiry.

[44 FR 21624, Apr. 11, 1979; 44 FR 23515, Apr. 20, 1979, as amended at 54 FR 14072, Apr. 7, 1989]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases, 1974–2018 · leading case: Soundboard Ass'n v. Fed. Trade Comm'n

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Soundboard Ass'n v. Fed. Trade Comm'n (2018) cadc · cites it 9× “”3 16 C.F.R. § 1.1 (b). The fact that the Commission “has authorized” staff to give advice on matters of lesser importance does not transform staff views into the Commission’s views.”

Price v. Philip Morris, Inc. (2006) ill · cites it 2× “See 16 C.F.R. § 1.1 (permitting any person, partnership, or corporation to request advice from the FTC "with respect to a course of action which the requesting party proposes to pursue").”

Belfiore v. Procter & Gamble Co. (2015) nyed “16 C.F.R. § 1.1 . “A request for advice is initiated by submitting three copies of the request to the Secretary of the FTC, which should state clearly the questions to be resolved, cite provisions of law under which the question arises, and set forth all material facts.”

Federal Trade Commission v. Rockefeller (1977) nysd · cites it 2× “46, 49, 50; FTC Procedures and Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 1.1 et. seq. and supplements thereto.”

Razilov v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance (2003) ord “See also 16 C.F.R. §§ 1.1 — 1.3 (FTC information opinions and their nonbinding effect).”

Federal Trade Commission v. Carter (1979) dcd “§§ 46 , 49, 50; and FTC Procedures and Rules of Practice, 16 C.F.R. § 1.1 et seq. On May 12, the Commission issued the 28 subpoenas at issue here.”

Federal Trade Commission v. David Rockefeller (1979) ca2 · cites it 2× “46, 49, 50; FTC Procedures and Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 1.1 et seq. and supplements thereto.”

Federal Trade Commission v. Rockefeller (1979) ca2 · cites it 2× “46, 49, 50; FTC Procedures and Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 1.1 et seq. and supplements thereto.”

Odessky v. Federal Trade Commission (1979) dcd · cites it 2× “16 C.F.R. § 1.1 (1978). The FTC will not proceed against the requesting party with respect to any advice taken in good faith reliance upon an advisory opinion, when all relevant facts were fully, completely, and accurately presented to the Commission and when such action was…”

Federal Trade Commission v. Markin (1974) miwd “46, 49, 50; FTC Procedures and Rules of Practice 16 C.F.R. 1.1, et seq. and supplements thereto.”

Price v. Philip Morris, Inc. (2005) ill “See 16 C.F.R. §1.1 (permitting any person, partnership, or corporation to request advice from the FTC “with respect to a course of action which the requesting party proposes to pursue”).”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.