In the Matter of the Complaint Against

 AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF HOME INCOME PROGRAMS or AAHIP
 Postal Unit 29309 at
 San Antonio, TX 78229

 P.S. Docket No. 8/19;  
 
 07/29/80
 
 Cohen, James A.  

 APPEARANCE FOR COMPLAINANT:
 Kristin L. Malmberg, Esq.
 Consumer Protection Division
 Law Department
 U. S. Postal Service
 Washington, DC 20260

 APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:
 James A. Bliss, Owner .
 American Association of Home
 Income Programs or AAHIP
 Postal Unit 29309 
 San Antonio, TX 78229

Respondent seeks clarification of Mail Stop Order No. 80-141 which forbids the delivery of mail and payment of money orders to Respondent in connection with the sale of membership in the "American Association of Home Income Programs (or AAHIP)." Respondent contends that the receipt of responses to classified advertisements which have been found to comprise a portion of the advertising containing false representations does not relate to the sale of membership in the "American Association of Home Income Programs (or AAHIP)." Respondent also argues that it should be allowed to obtain the names and addresses of persons responding to its classified advertisements.

Complainant opposes Respondent's request to obtain the responses to the classified advertising and the names and addresses of persons responding to such advertising.

The mail Respondent seeks to obtain relates to the same scheme which was the subject of Mail Stop Order No. 80-141. Accordingly, Respondent is not entitled to receive such mail and the mail is to be returned to senders in accordance with the terms of the Mail Stop Order.

Respondent's request that it be allowed to obtain the names and addresses of the senders of such mail is also without merit. Although under 39 U.S.C. § 3005 and the terms of the Mail Stop Order Respondent has been granted the opportunity to examine the mail, such examination is for the purpose of allowing Respondent to receive any mail not connected with the activities found to violate the cited statute, or mail requesting a refund or return of merchandise connected with such activities. Neither the statute nor the Mail Stop Order allows Respondent to obtain the names and addresses it seeks. Moreover, allowing Respondent's request could very well defeat the purpose of the statute. Accordingly, Respondent's request is denied.