Visa 2013 Annual Report Download - page 131

VISA INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
September 30, 2013
Consumer Class Actions. In October 2011, a purported consumer class action (Stoumbos) was
filed against Visa and MasterCard in the same federal court challenging the same ATM access fee
rules. Two other purported consumer class actions were also filed in October 2011 in the same federal
court, and were later combined into a single amended complaint (Mackmin). The amended complaint
challenges the same ATM access fee rules and names Visa, MasterCard and three financial
institutions as defendants. Both Stoumbos and Mackmin purport to represent classes and sub-classes
of consumers in claims brought under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, and also allege claims under
antitrust and/or consumer protection statutes in certain states and the District of Columbia. The
lawsuits seek injunctive relief, attorneys’ fees, treble damages, and restitution where available under
state law.
On January 30, 2012, Visa, MasterCard, and the defendant financial institutions filed motions to
dismiss the complaints in the National ATM Council class action and the consumer class actions. On
February 13, 2013, the court granted the motion to dismiss and dismissed the cases without prejudice.
On March 12, 2013, plaintiffs in the National ATM Council class action and the consumer class actions
moved for an order altering or amending the court’s February 13, 2013 order to provide that (1) the
complaints (as opposed to the cases) are dismissed without prejudice, and (2) plaintiffs may move to
amend their complaints. On April 15, 2013, plaintiffs in the National ATM Council class action and the
Stoumbos case moved for leave to file amended complaints. On April 18, 2013, plaintiffs in the
Mackmin case moved for leave to file an amended complaint. Defendants filed responses opposing the
motions on the grounds that they are not procedurally proper and would be futile in any event. On
April 24, 2013, the court ordered the defendants to file further detailed responses, addressing futility in
particular. Briefing on the motions is complete.
U.S. Department of Justice Civil Investigative Demand
On March 13, 2012, the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice (the
“Division”) issued a Civil Investigative Demand, or “CID,” to Visa Inc. seeking documents and
information regarding a potential violation of Section 1 or 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1, 2. The
CID focuses on PIN-Authenticated Visa Debit and Visa’s competitive responses to the Dodd-Frank Act,
including Visa’s fixed acquirer network fee. Visa is cooperating with the Division in connection with the
CID.
Federal Trade Commission Voluntary Access Letter
On September 21, 2012, the Bureau of Competition of the United States Federal Trade
Commission (the “Bureau”) requested that Visa provide on a voluntary basis documents and
information regarding potential violations of certain regulations associated with the Dodd-Frank Act,
particularly Section 920(b)(1)(B) of the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, 15 U.S.C. 1693o-2, and
Regulation II, 12 C.F.R. § 235.7(b) (commonly known as the “Durbin Amendment” and regulations).
The request focuses on information related to the purposes, implementation, and impact of the optional
PIN Debit Gateway Service. The revenue generated by the PIN Debit Gateway Service is not material
to the Company’s financial statements. Visa is cooperating with the Bureau and responding to its
information requests.
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
On February 7, 2013, Visa received a letter from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
(“CFPB”) seeking documents and information, on a voluntary basis, regarding Visa’s practices with
123