~'-~~~:~~~\~r~~~~'~'~~ '~/.") f,:,_ \,.. ,~- V..li1AI"!'~ ,;,r \-::\,.' _ ...'1 ~ "Pl,""'" liFe:.,',!\I':" iV"~IHI-N T.~\J.s; ' ~ ~;" :, ;1 ï. ~ f;, ".\ :,
 .v' -. ,.! .,.. . ',,",."'O! " '0 OR'A~Fi~?i J\ L ~~~~~a-\~..

, ~,PftU!~ ~,
 i ¡.~ L vJ
 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 5fd 0.31


BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION SECRETARY

In the Matter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327 

)

Polypore International, Inc. )


a corporation ) PUBLIC DOCUMENT1
 

)
 

RESPONDENT'S MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO ENTEK INTERNATIONAL
 

LLC'S MOTION TO QUASH THE SUBPOENAS AD TESTIFICANDUM ISSUED TO
 

GRAEME FRASER-BELL AND ROBERT KEITH
 

Respondent Polypore International, Inc. ("Polypore") respectfully submits this 

Memorandum in Opposition to ENTEK International LLC' s ("ENTEK") Motion to Quash the 

Subpoenas Ad Testifcandum Issued to Graeme Fraser-Bell ("Fraser-Bell") and Robert Keith 

("Keith"). 

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 

ENTEK is a direct competitor of Polypore. ENTEK is a leading producer of 

polyethylene ("PE") battery separators for starting, lighting and ignition (SLI) lead-acid 

batteries. (Redacted - Subject to Protective Orderf 

On November 10, 2008, Respondent served a subpoena duces tecum on ENTEK seeking 

access to (Redacted - Subject to Protective Order) and other information and evidence
 

relevant to Respondent's defense in this case. ENTEK initially raised some objection to the 

subpoena duces tecum, but through negotiation, such concerns were ultimately resolved and a 

discovery agreement was reached in principal on December 11, 2008 which allowed ENTEK to 

i Respondent's Memorandum in Opposition to ENTEK International LLC's Motion to Quash the Subpoenas Ad 

Testificandum Issued to Graeme Fraser-Bell and Robert Keith refers to and contains information identified as "Confidential 

Material" under the terms of the Protective Order entered in this matter. Such "Confidential Material" has been (bolded and 

bracketed) in the complete version of Respondent's Memorandum and has been redacted and labeled "(Redacted - Subject to 

Protective Order)" in the public version of Respondent's Memorandum. 

2 (Redacted - Subject to Protective Order) 

PPAB I524884vl 
begin the production of documents.3 ENTEK's first production of documents pursuant to 

Respondent's subpoena duces tecum occurred on January 5, 2009. 

On or about December 30, 2008, Respondent served four subpoenas ad testifcandum on 

ENTEK and noticed the depositions of the following individuals and entities: (a) Mr. Robert 

Keith, (b) Mr. Daniel Weerts, (c) Mr. Graeme Fraser-Bell, and (d) a corporate subpoena directed 

to ENTEK International, LLC. The depositions of Mr. Fraser-Bell and ENTEK International, 

Inc. were noticed for January 19,2009, while the depositions of 
 Mr. Keith and Mr. Weerts were 

noticed for January 20,2009. 

On January 9,2009, however, ENTEK filed the instant motion in which it seeks to quash 

the subpoenas ad testifcandum directed to Keith, ENTEK's President and Chief Executive 

Offcer, and Fraser-Bell, ENTEK's International Ltd.'s Vice President of International Sales. 

Respondent's subpoenas ad testifcandum directed at Keith and Fraser-Bell are calculated to 

yield relevant information vital to Respondent's defense in the pending FTC proceeding. 

Respondent asserts that ENTEK's grounds for its motion are without merit and asks the 

Administrative Law Judge to deny ENTEK's motion and enforce the subpoenas ad 

testifcandum. 

ARGUMENT 

ENTEK's motion to quash in unwarranted. The FTC's Rules allow Polypore to "obtain 

discovery to the extent that it may be reasonably expected to yield information relevant to the 

allegations in the complaint, to the proposed relief, or to the defenses of (the) respondent." 16 

C.PR. § 3.31 (c)(I). Moreover, "any party may take a deposition. . provided that such 

deposition is reasonably expected to yield information within the scope of discovery under § 

3 Despite the agreement reached regarding Respondent's subpoena duces tecum, ENTEK has been dilatory in 

producing documents to Respondent, necessitating the fiing of a motion to compel, which is currently pending. 

2 

PPAB 1524884vl 
3.31(c)(1)." 16 CPR. § 3.33(a). Discovery should be limited only if 
 the burden outweighs the 

benefit. 16 CPR. § 3.31 (c)(I). In fact, "public interest requires that once a complaint issues. . . 

Commission counsel (and respondent's counsel when they put on their defense) be given the 

opportnity to develop those facts which are essential" to support or undermine the allegations in 

the pleadings. In re Gen. Foods., No. 9085 C, 1978 FTC LEXIS 412 at *6 (April 18, 1978). 

It its memorandum in support of its motion to quash, ENTEK wrongly asserts that the 

alleged burdens associated with the depositions of Fraser-Bell and Keith should preclude the 

depositions taking place. The fact that Keith and Fraser-Bell may be busy corporate executives, 

however, does not prevent them from being deposed. See Arkwright Mutual Ins. Co. v. National 

Union Fire Ins. Co., 1993 WL 34678 at 2 (S.D.N.Y. 1993)(allowing the deposition of the 

president of AIG to proceed); CBS, Inc. v. Ahern, 102 F.R.D. 820, 822 (S.D.N.Y. 1984)("the fact 

that the witness has a busy schedule is simply not a basis for foreclosing otherwise proper
 

discovery.") As discussed herein, the benefits of deposing Keith and Fraser-Bell outweigh the 

alleged minimal burdens that purportedly would be caused by such depositions. 

As ENTEK's document productions to (Redacted - Subject to Protective Order) 

Respondent demonstrate, Keith and Fraser-Bell are both material fact witnesses with respect to 

Respondent's defenses in this proceeding. 

In particular, the documents that ENTEK and third-party Johnson Controls, Inc. ("JCI") 

have produced to Respondent to date, reveal that Keith has knowledge of several issues relevant 

and necessary to Respondent's defense of 
 the Commission's allegations in this proceeding. For 

example, it is clear from ENTEK's limited production of documents thus far that (Redacted ­

Subject to Protective Order)(Tab A). It is also evident that (Redacted - Subject to Protective 

Order)(Tab B). 

3 

PPAB 1524884vl 
Additionally, (Redacted - Subject to Protective Order)(Tab C), (Redacted - Subject 

to Protective Order)(Tab D). 

Moreover, as ENTEK's President and CEO, Keith is believed to have knowledge of 

ENTEK's strategic plans, including but not limited to: (Redacted - Subject to Protective 

Order) (Tab E). Such information is important to Respondent's defense in this proceeding and, 

as a result, Respondent is entitled to depose Keith in order to obtain this information. (See 

January 7, 2009 e-mail of 
 Eric D. Welsh, Esq.)(Tab F). 

ENTEK also refuses to make Fraser-Bell available for a deposition, whether here or in 

the United Kingdom. There is no dispute, however, that Fraser-Bell has information relevant 

and necessary to Respondent's defense of 
 the Commission's allegations in this proceeding. For 

example, prior to the institution of 
 this proceeding, (Redacted - Subject to Protective Order). 

Additionally, it is believed Fraser-Bell possesses important evidence in this matter 

because he is intimately involved in ENTEK's battery separator sales to customers located 

throughout the world and is believed to be knowledgeable of other suppliers of battery separators 

in Europe. To wit, ENTEK International LLC and its European subsidiary ENTEK International 

Ltd. produce and sell battery separators around the globe. As the Vice President of International 

Sales, Fraser-Bell is "responsible for managing ENTEK International Ltd.' s relationship with 

non-North American customers" which "requires regular travel to visit customers throughout 

Europe and Asia." (See Declaration of Graeme Fraser-Bell in Support of ENTEK International 

LLC's Motion to Quash the Subpoena Ad Testifcandum Issued to Graeme Fraser-Bell and 

Robert Keith Pursuant to 16 C.F.R. § 3.34(c)). Importantly, ENTEK, in its motion to quash, 

does not deny that Fraser-Bell has extensive knowledge of matters relevant to this action. Nor 

do they deny that he has, and does, travel to the United States for business meetings at ENTEK. 

4 

PPAB 1524884vl 
In fact, (Redacted - Subject to Protective Order) (Tab G). This evidence cannot be obtained
 

from sources other than Fraser-Bell. 

Despite Respondent's clear need to depose Fraser-Bell, and the fact the ENTEK's 

counsel accepted service of the subpoena ad testifcandum directed to Fraser-Bell (see December 

30, 2008 e-mail of Darius Ogloza, Esq.)(Tab H), ENTEK attempts to argue that the subpoena ad 

testifcandum directed to Fraser-Bell is invalid based on allegedly defective service and process.4 

ENTEK's argument is without basis. 

First, Fraser-Bell is clearly within the possession, custody and control of ENTEK. 

Fraser-Bell's declaration in support of ENTEK's motion to quash states that he is a British 

citizen, and serves as the Vice President of International Sales for ENTEK International Ltd., a 

wholly-owned company of ENTEK International LLC, a corporation with its principle place of 

business in Lebanon, Oregon. (See Declaration of Graeme Fraser-Bell in Support of ENTEK 

International LL's Motion to Quash the Subpoena Ad Testifcandum Issued to Graeme FraserBell and Robert Keith Pursuant to 16 CPR. § 3. 
 34(c)). 

Second, (Redacted - Subject to Protective Order) (Tab G). Accordingly, ENTEK has 

control over Fraser-Bell and his documents. 

Third, and perhaps most importantly, ENTEK represented the Fraser-Bell's position was 

with ENTEK International LLC and not its European subsidiary ENTEK International Ltd. (See 

January 7, 2009 e-mail of Eric D. Welsh, Esq.)(Tab F). In (Redacted - Subject to Protective
 

Order) and in the negotiations with Respondent over the subpoena duces tecum, ENTEK has 

blurred any distinction between ENTEK and its European operations; treating them as being the 

4 To ensure the timely deposition of Graeme Fraser-Bell, Respondent sought leave from this Court to take the 

deposition of Fraser-Bell in the United Kingdom pursuant to FTC Rule 16 C.F.R. § 3.36(b). See Motion/or Leave to Take the 

Deposition o/Graeme Fraser-Bell in the United Kingdom Pursuant to 16 C.F.R. § 3.36. Should ENTEK's motion to quash be 

denied, as it should be, Respondent's subpoena ad testifcandum should be enforced which would obviate the need for 

Respondent's Motion for Leave to Take the Deposition of Graeme Fraser-Bell in the United Kingdom Pursuant to 16 C.F.R. § 

3.36. 

5 

PPAB 1524884vl 
same. For example, (Redacted - Subject to Protective Order)(Tab I). During the course of 

Respondent's negotiations with ENTEK regarding Respondent's subpoena duces tecum, ENTEK 

objected to reviewing email fies from large numbers of custodians but agreed to limit the review 

to three people. Fraser-Bell, who ENTEK represented was ENTEK's Vice President of 

International Sales, was one of the three proffered custodians. (See December 22, 2008 Letter 

Agreement, Section II - Request No. 5 ("ENTEK shall produce copies of responsive documents 

from the files of Dan Weerts, Vice President of Sales & Marketing, Graeme Fraser-Bell, Vice 

President International Sales, and Greg Humphrey, North & South America Account 

Manager"))(emphasis added)(Tab J). Now, after negotiating with Respondent (Redacted ­

Subject to Protective Order) and then acknowledging the importance of Fraser-Bell's files to 

this matter, ENTEK attempts to distance itself from him, oddly arguing that discovery should not 

be had of him because his knowledge is alleged to be "minimaL."

In sum, Respondent has a legitimate and substantial need for deposing Graeme FraserBell and Robert Keith. Given the short time remaining before the scheduled discovery cut-off 

deadline in this proceeding, Respondent should be allowed to proceed with the depositions of 

Graeme Fraser-Bell and Robert Keith as soon as possible in order to obtain the information 

necessary for its defense in this proceeding. 

CONCLUSION 

For the foregoing reasons, Respondent respectfully requests that this Cour deny in whole 

ENTEK's Motion to Quash the Subpoenas Ad Testificandum Issues to Graeme Fraser-Bell and 

Robert Keith. 

6 

PPAB l524884vl 
Dated: January 21, 2009 Respectfully Submitted, 

~ò~~


Wi iam L. Rikard, Jr. ..
 

Eric D . Welsh 

PARKR POE ADAMS & BERNSTEIN, LLP 

Three Wachovia Center 

401 South Tryon Street, Suite 3000 

Charlotte, NC 28202 

Telephone: (704) 372-9000 

Facsimile: (704) 335-9689 

williamrikard(qparkerpoe.com 

ericwelsh(qparkerpoe.com 

John F. Graybeal 

PARKER POE ADAMS & BERNSTEIN, LLP 

150 Fayettevile Street 

Raleigh, NC 27602 

Telephone: (919) 835-4599 

Facsimile: (919) 828-0564 

j ohngraybeal(qparkerpoe.com 

Attorneys for Respondent 

PPAB l524884vl 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on January 21, 2009, I caused to be fied via hand delivery and 

electronic mail delivery an original and two copies of 
 the foregoing Respondent's Memorandum 

in Opposition to ENTEK International LLC's Motion to Quash the Subpoenas Ad 

Testifcandum Issued to Graeme Fraser-Bell and Robert Keith, and that the electronic copy is a 

true and correct copy of the paper original and that a paper copy with an original signature is 

being filed with: 

Donald S. Clark, Secretary 

Office of the Secretary 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Rm. H-135 

Washington, DC 20580 

secretary~ftc.gov 

I hereby certify that on January 21, 2009, I caused to be served one copy via electronic 

mail delivery and two copies via overnight mail delivery of the foregoing Respondent's
 

Memorandum in Opposition to ENTEK International LLC's Motion to Quash the Subpoenas 

Ad Testifcandum Issued to Graeme Fraser-Bell and Robert Keith upon: 

The Honorable D. Michael Chappell 

Administrative Law Judge 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

oalj~ftc.gov 

I hereby certify that on January 21, 2009, I caused to be served via first-class mail 

delivery and electronic mail delivery a copy of the foregoing Respondent's Memorandum in 

Opposition to ENTEK International LLC's Motion to Quash the Subpoenas Ad Testifcandum 

Issued to Graeme Fraser-Bell and Robert Keith upon: 

J. Robert Robertson, Esq. Steven Dahm, Esq. 

Federal Trade Commission Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 Washington, DC 20580 

rrobertson~ftc.gov sdahm~ftc.gov 

Darius Ogloza, Esq.
 

LATHAM & WATKINS, LLP
 

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000
 

San Francisco, California 94111-6538
 

DARIUS.OGLOZA~L W.com
 

PPAB l524884vl 
A~5~
 

Adam C. Shearer
 

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP
 

Three Wachovia Center
 

401 South Tryon Street, Suite 3000
 

Charlotte, NC 28202
 

Telephone: (704) 335-9050
 

Facsimile: (704) 334-4706
 

PPAB l524884vl 
\.
 

UNTED- ST ATES' OF AMERlCA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADKCOMMISSION 

hi the Màtter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327 

) Polyp ore International, lp.c. ) 

a: ,corporation ) 

) 

TAB A 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERA TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327 

) Polypore International, Inè. )
 a corporation
 ) 

) 

FILED UNDER SEAL 

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE 

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER 

PPAB 152I103vt 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA . 

BEFORE THE FEDERA TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of )
 

) Docket No. .9327 

) 

Polypore International, Inc. .)
 a corporation ) . 

) 

TABB
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERA TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327


) 

Polypore International, Inc. ) 

a corporation ) 

) 

FILED UNDER SEAL 

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMTION PURSUANT TO THE
 

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER 

PPAB 1521 I03vl 
UNITED STATES OF AMRICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327

) 

Polyp ore International, Inc. )
 

a corporation )
 

)
 

TABC 
UNITED STATES OF AMRICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERA TRAE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of	 ) 

) Docket No. 9327 

)
 

Polypore International, Inc. )
 

a corporation )
 

) 

FILED UNDER SEAL 

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMTION PURSUANT TO THE
 

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER 

PPAB 1521 lO3vl 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION . \
 

In the Matter of ) 

Docket No. 9327
 ) 

) 

Polypore International, Inc. ) . 

a corporation ) 

) 

TAB.D 

" 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of	 ) 

) Docket No. 9327 

)
 

Polypore International, Inc. )


a corporation )
 

) 

FILED UNDER SEAL 

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE 

CONFIDENTIAITY ORDER 

PPAB 1521103vl 
. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327 

) 

Polypore International, Inc. ) 

a corporation ) 

) 

TABE
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERA TRAE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

Docket No. 9327 ) 

) 

Polypore International, Inc. ) 

a corporation ) 

) 

FILED UNDER SEAL 

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE 

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER 

. PPAB 1521103vl 
;. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
 

In the Matter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327 

) 

Polypore International, Inc. 

a corporation 

) 

) 

) 

TABF
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRAE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327 

) 

Polypore International, Inc. ) 

a corporation ) 

) 

FILED UNDER SEAL 

CONFIDENTIAL INORMATION PURSUANT TO THE
 

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER 

PPAB 1521 I03vl 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327 

) 

. Polypore International, Inc. ) 

a corporation ) 

) 

TABG
 
UNTED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERA TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

)
 Docket No. 9327

)
 

Polypore International, Inc. )
 

a corporation )
 

) 

FILED UNDER SEAL 

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE 

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER 

PPAB 1521103vl 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE 'THE FEDERAL T'RADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

) Docket Nn. 9327

) 

Polypore International, Inc. ) 

a corporation ) 

) 

TABH
 
From: DARIUS.OGLOZA~LW.coin (mailto:DARIUS.OGLÒZA~t W.com) 

Serit: Tuesday, December 30; 2008 1 :35 PM 

To: Welsh, Eric D. 

Cc: Ilano.Kaiser~iw.com; Brett. Collns~lw.com 

. Subject: RE: In re Polypore International, Inc., Docket No. 9327 

Eric: 

This confimis thatwe are authorized to accept service of 
 your deposition subpoena. .Ifyou


. have availabledates/locatiôns for the deposition in mind, wewould appreciate.hearing.from you 

as this wil help' get the ball rollng. ..' .


From: Welsh, Eric D. (mailto:eI'¿welsh~parkerp~e;corI) 

. . .
 

Sent: Tuesday, Decemher 30,20088:16 AM .

To':Uglo~ Darius (SF) ... .
 

Subject: In re POlyPore International, Inc., Docket No.. 9327 

matter, Iwanted tò let you know thatl am sending out 

some'deposition subpoenas fOr depositions of representatives of your client, Èntek. As we have . ' 

In connection withtheabo've referenced 


discussed before; we have certain deadlinesírithis matter that must be met and accordingly; 1 ani 

serving the subpoenas now. I wil certainly work with you to the extent possible on the date for 

me to send a copy to you and whether the, examinations. Please let me know ifYûuwpuld like 

client. Than you. you would accept service on behalf of yoUr 


we be produced pursuant to the subp()ena duceS tecum,
 Also, with respect to the döci:ents to 


these depositions so thàt we can be obviously wil need to receive the docuIehts in advance of 


efficient in the examinations. If documents are to be produced' in electronic, fOrmat, I ask that 

you please cónilctinyparalegal, Timora' Wilkerson, at1Ö4:"335-95.21 to co.ordinate on
 

formatting,which I understand would need tobè'intiffform. Than you for youni.ttention to

this riatter. 

Bestregards, , 

EricWelilh 

Eric Welsh'
 

Parer 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRAE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327


) 

Polypor~ International, Inc. ) 

a corporation ) 

) 

TAB I
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327 

) 

Polypore International, Inc. )

a corporation ) 

) 

FILED UNDER SEAL 

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE
 

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER
 

PPAB l521103vl 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

Docket No. 9327 ) 

) 

Polypore International, Inc. ) 

a corporation ) 

) 

TABJ 
...... . . 08r1ii c. 01l10!8.
 505 Montgoriety ~lrlll, Suite 2000 ....:. . Olrect DIal: 416-395.8149	 San FninclS/o, CiilltOmta 94111.0li38 l/~~~r ,':, : dBrluø.ci!OZB~Iw.cOm '.	 Tel: +1.4.15.91,0600 Fax: +1.415.95.8095 

WW.Iw.coin "dhi ,. .
 

FìßM ; AfFILIATE OFFICES' ~~~':~ LATH AM&. W A T KIN S LLP' .; ":f":' " . Abu DhBbl' MUrilch

Barcelona. ..: ; ~.	 New JeT8ey 

Brussii New YOrk 

. :.::.:'t:' Clilcago . Nòilhem Virginia 

Doha O",~~ County 

... Deceinber 22, 2008 OUbÍll Pa~$ 

: FrGnkfiiit . Rome 

. . .~.(\ .:	 Hamburg Sall Diego ;::.:.i.,' . VIA EMAlL '-.' t"~ . '~":. .	 HOn~ Kong '. San. FranCIsco
 

London Sh,iinghal
 : :,~~~/~.' .: 

Lò. Anii\Iln Silcon V¡¡lIiiy . . 

Eric D. Welsh Mad~il Singapore 

Mila'n TOkyo '. Parker Poe Aciams & Bemstein LLP, l;~~,-	 Moscow Washington, D.C.
 :.~ ~:~.~: ;: . T1iee Wachov~a Center,Suite 3000 " ',,1:.:. 

'. '.~~'::~;: ~ 401 South Tryon Street Flll No. 030â80-00Ö'7 

Charlotte;NC 28202
 

Re: In the Mattr '. . ' ,"". .
 of Polyp ore Jhtltmätionai' Inc.. Case No; 9327'

Dear Eric: 

Tilts letter, ifcounters~gned by yo.u,mödifies the subpoena.ç/uceslcQÚmserve"don 

. ENTEK. Interntional LLC e'ENTEK") by'PolypoI'e Intemationid; Iiie. ("Polypol'e").on 

November 6, 2008 ("Subpoena") aid constitutès an agteemtmt ("Agreement;') 'betwe¿mPolýpore 

and.ENTEK ûointly, the "paréS'), tesÖlving'all discovery iSSue~'anddisputes raised.in . 

cop.èction With the Subpoena. The Agreement affords additional protection to'doc~lÍmmts and ~~ ~ t . ',1,1,:. . oth~r infóm!atiôri tòbe produced',byENtEK'in Ì'sponsetothe SubpoeM (ldENrEK
 

counsel and advisørs to
 . Iifomiation"), and at the .saie time ensures that a, group. ofoutsid(;:" 


PòIypor~1 defiiicd,beloV(,.wiIlöbtain accesstoENTBK Infonuatiou.that POlyPore requires for its .... .:...........
 

defense ina:timely riåne¡'; the Agreement.shaH not limit Polypore's riglittointerview or seek 

. d~.!;~.::'r . 'relevant depositon testimony tròm,EN1'K personnel, ondditional ENTEK 'liÛonnation 'if 

Polypore beHews thatthe ENTEK Inforrtion produced fi:ils to iespoiidtoth~ level" of inqidfy 

:/Jt':. desci'bedin this I~tter. CorrspoAa~iigly;'ENTEK reserves it iightto ôbjeci'tQ süchreauØsts. '. '...;:::. .. . .
 

. .
 

. I. General Al!l'eements

.'	 (I) Datecutoff: The defauitdate cut öfffor the Subpoena
 . .
 " "
 is "January i, 2003:

. (2)Ðisclosure Group and Mioliaeti;.Shor: ¡)isclOSle' ofENTKIiorrationís limited 

to the following iiidividûâJà: ' (a) Qüts,jde'ahtltrist'liUgätiöri'cöUh~eI;ì:è~~PaIkerPoe Adams & 

Bemstehi l,LP ("Pa.ker Poe") attonwys stafe4. on the' màtter; . (b) outside midtrst economists' 

. (~.g..,CRAI, CoinpássL~xecon,.,LECÚ, Btattedtôup)'retaned by Polypör~ásc~iisuitatsortestifying expertfor pUl'oseS..9f.tWs litigáti.~a("ßcoiioniièRjpèis"); (c) Approved:Industi. ',. .~ Exp'erts asdefihed,in para8lapJi (5..) .b~iów;; (d) lØrinistrative ta~ludgepresidiligOv.er.this 

prooeeding. personnel assjsting ilè:.Adnini~trativ~ Law 'Judge;. thê Çommission áId its 

emJ;io~ees! andailtitrust,ecónom,ists:ret4ined' by th.e .CötIissionäs experts otcon~ultants for 

'.. this prciceçding; . (e) judges 'aJd óthei, cO,uit .personrçlpf iuW CQutt. havingjUiiadiction over any 

'¡. ~ 

. "'::i~~"­ ,': 
Enc D. WeIth 

December 22,.2008 

Page 2
 

LATHAM&WATKI NSLLP. 

:' 

.', i 

.' .
 

¡ 

appellate proceedings involving this matter; (t) court reporters in this matter; (g) any ENTEK . 

witness òr deponent who. may .have al,ored or received .t4e ENTEK Infoimation; ånd (h)ary 

other person(s) 'to whom EN-TEK agrees to. in wrting. :&ch individual member of the Disclosure 

Group identified in' (2)(á)(b)( c) ánd(h) ~hall sign and retu a copy of ths . 
 letter tÓ ~rettCoU!ns) 

Esq., LATHAM & WATKINS LLP, 505 Mont~omery Street, San Frim,cisco, CA 941 1 i .'. .
 

(brett.collns~'W'9oni) prior to accessing MY ENTEKlnformation, For putposes of clarification, 

Michael L. Shor is!l.a member of 
 the DisclosureGroup, imd no' ENTEK Infòriation may be 

shared, disclosed; or made availablein WlyWay, directly or indirectly, to him. . 

(3) Access toENtEK lnf-oriâtiòn: lnorder toprevênt disclo'sure ofENTEK Information 

to Polyporebeyond tbe.Disclosure,Group, as defined in (2) above, aU ENTEK Infonnatión'shall 

oniy be mt.intained IJÜuidaccêssed from the offces of Parker Poe, those of the Economic 

Experts ¡md/or those of the' Approved IndustrExperts (to'gether, ,the "Restrcted Locations"). In 

event ilat ENrnK Inforation is imported into a documentfeview system, s\lcb. ENTEK 

Informatioashall be accesßedonly from tel'irialslocatedina Restricted Location. Access t() 

any: documenheview system shall be passWord protected. Thë. distribution of p4sswords shan 'be . 

limited to members of the Disclos'ure Group.. Nò ENTEK lriformation may' be removed (rom the 

the 

Restrcted Locations exc~pt ~ necessary to transfer ENTEI( Information from one Restncted . 

Location to another (e.g., from Parker Poeto the' Economic Experts). ENTEK Information that

wil be used as exlbits at depositions, heiuingsor trialmay be remoVed from the Restrcted

Locations for that piuoseonly and, afer use, must be'ïèturedtoa RestrictedLocation. For
 

purposes of ciarification, Polyprema:y providéthe Cöniìssion with,ii. c()py ofENTEK
 

Ipformation produced in resPQnše to the' Subpoert 'asrequited bythe Scheduling Qi'der, dated
 October 22,i~008. .'
 (4) RetuofENTEK InformatiQìi: Uporithecompletion of the present proceedings and 

any related appeal, the Disclosure Gr~up shall ietu aU. ENTEK Information obtaned in this 

action to ENTK and no copies.may be riÜlintained.

. (5) IndusttexRerts.:. Should Polypre -retan industr ~xpert - as opposed to Econ()mlc
 

Expert ~ in COnitcti,o~ :w.lt1 thisproce.Øtli1Jg and wish to .discloSQ ENK inforiâtioïi to such 

experts;Polypore sh~n notityliTEKor!ts intetittid idehtify the hiClustrexp~rt(s)'to whom it . 

wi$hesto disclose suoh inforration (dong with sufc.ient hiformati.oïi about the proposed .... 

expert(s).to perifENTEK to asceråin whether the propos!,d 'expert is acceptab1e (including, but

at ENK',s 

. rëquest make any' proPQsed industr expert(s) available for one telephone interview not to exceed 

one (I) hour. Any industr. expert sbaii:not have been-employed by Polyp,ore and ahallnot be . 

notlirnited to, a cuticulum vitae).. Moreover, ard to the- saqe end, P~lypore. shall 


employed by Polypo-re or:provide.:consulting'servces to Pcjlypore (outside of the present matter) 

for a pertod,OftWo (2) years after the'finaHesoluti6n'öfthis proceeding.Fot pÚloses of' '
 

clatifi,ciition, the. indú~try expert must Under. 'ito cirçumsUicesdisclose EN1'K Information to 

anyone outsldeofthe Disclosure. Oroup.ENTEK shall have th~ opportity tofiea motion fot
 

protective order with the:Adiinístrat~veLaw Judge,seekitig to stop disclosurè ofENTEK 

Jnfot'ation to the noticeØ' inClustr expert(s) within (lO) busine.ss days of recefpt of-the notice. In
 

the eve.nt-tlat ENTEK dOès .tiot seek åprQtective,otder, the Ii9ticQd expert(s) shall be considered 

written approvai iioticefrom .
 

ENTEK, whichever is eatlier ("Approved Industry Expert").
 

approved afer expiration oftle ten (10) buahiëss. day period or 

~ .;.
 
EriC D. WeIil) 

Deçiimber 2', 2008 

P8\Je3 

LAT.HAM4iW!ATKI N SLLP 

(6) No waiver ofprivileg~:For purpses öfclarfication, the paries db not interpret this , .

Agreement as requiring ENTBK to wàive its right to withold from production any information 

protected from discovery' by theattOri~y..client privilege, the work product doctrine, the common
 

interest doctrine or anY other ~pp(icabie discovery privilege or eX~mption.
 

. (7) Remedies:, The paries acknowiedg~ and agree that breach ofthe General Agreme~ts
 

may cause itreparable injUr to BNTK for which mpnetar damägel! are not a suffcient
 

reinèdy. Accordingly, :ÈTBK may seek injÜnctive reli~fandaiy other iwaihibleequitable
 ...~­ remedies to enforce thése'provisions withont posting a'bond if otherWisi; required by law. For 

limits ENTEK's rights to seek moneta, , pUroses of clarification, this. provision in .no way 


includhig pwitlve damageS for breach or this agreement and/or improper disclosure öf ENTEK 

Irioriation fromPqlypore~ Parker Poet the.EoonomicExperts,:aid o.ther:naiual pètsonsor
 

entitie.sasthe case may be. Moreover¡ this Agrement shall in no. 
 Way limit ENTEK's rights . 

under the Prøtective Order date4 Oc:ober 23, 2008. .
 

'D. Ae:reements With Resnect ta SO,ecifc Requests 

Request Nos. 1 and 2: ENrnK shaii produce a wrlttên response listing all products in
 

development by ENTBK or aiY Third Par to compete with Polypore lead acid battery
 separators. " 

Request l-o. 3 Wid 4: EN1'K shàii produce a written responsø listiP.g mooufacturing or 

production facilities fQr lead acid'~i,ttety sepåtitors in'wmchJtNTEK..mainttûnsarY director . 

indirect oWnershipînterest. The wrtteri¡'~spo..Qse shall íiiclùde the following infotmatIQn,:' (a) the' 

ëapital ~xpenditute for the constrction and .stårt~up:o¡' expänsion of such facilty, (b) the date on
 

which. plan for such .fiiciJty or~~pa.n:sicin of such' facjllty ;wer~apPl.ved, (c) the datè, on which" 

constrction began on s\lch facility; (d) the dati", of c.()nuiss~oniJ)g or. starP .of.such facilty, (e) 

the.production capacityofsuc~ 'facilty; (1) the. type_o.tpi()gUct(s)prQdui;ed at suchfacHity, (g) 

. the iutioipatedend use.(s)of the pr~1:cts nian~facturëd atsuah f~ciHty, (h) the, tçchnolo~y USQd
 

at such facil,ity to manufactU lead. acid battery separataTs and(i) the aóst pfthe lead acid batter 

separàtOrs manufactued and. sold a.t. ,such faciJjtyi tnclÙding,with9ut lim:itåion the cost of 

manufactung.andsemng such product.~, ìnci.udin8shippiitgco~.. '. ..'
 

Requ~st No.5:' ENTEK:' shai1produce coptes of tesponsiVedocuments from the fies of
 

.Dan Weert, Vice President of'saies &l Marketing, GremeFraset-Be1J, Vic.e President 

Intemational Sales, and Greg. Humphrey, North.& South America Account Manager, on the basis 

ora list, of specific search terms to :b.e..a~~e~ ~p.0ri by tllel'ares~, , ',., . '
 

Reauesj No. 6~~NTEK shalJ produce copie~ of the ~upply. agre~nieQts and proposals for 

supply agreements, eKc1uding drafs, betWeen ENTEK.and (a)JCI,,(b) Exide, (0) EnerSys,(d) 

East Peß., (è) Crowr, (f) Trojan, (g) US Battery, (h) C&D,.ôr (i) ary 
 other entity maufacturing 

lead acid patteries foi: sale in Nort America, for the sale by ~TEK to Stch entity of ¡ead acid

battery separators.' , .
 
E.itc i),'Welsh 

iji1ceii,ber'22, Z008

pÌiO,4' 

L,A T HA M&WAT KIN Si.LP 

Re.e~tN;!?s~7 .&" 19~J3~ ENTEK shati pröduee doqum.en~s sufñ~ient to shów'the 

ítiformätion sotight by,theser~llestsi'


ß~quest Nos. M;¡lj;&J~NTEK sh~it1lroçJu~e,a wrTten response ieflectinR the i'htol'atlQÎ1'

, . ,


söugli. '. ' '. !' " .~
 

"7::2C' ..¡::::~1it.K:shai,I pr..:duce..döc-i~llt~¡'sUftìcíetïi to s)iowthe , 

he.Sê-i:l1e'qijests:i 

~~J .:~i.;1 E;.rEK shirl produce Wtittenre&ponses. reflecting in'fonnätiöIl 

s. 

Reguestlfth24i" Pölypøi:e-lias';'wi thdhMrithis r.eqlJtst. . ." ~ . . '

RequestNos. 2'6...~: ENT-EK,shallproclÚce dôcúmehtssuffciênt to show'the:jnf'rmation sought 1?y thesé i'equ~sis~ " ,.
 

. Rtqnest~N'ô.".~~~J1N~ÉK"sh~1:i "prôduee:aödnments suffc.ient'toshow cU$tomêr testing. or 

quaIifiøitlØlof,àTtcítiad¡:aèi~dhatrtsepå:tätør:'p'ro.auced by'BNTiUt. ' , ' 

.,; , ,R~uy.st:;N9~' 3'Øi~ 3'3. ,~A, apd~'~;.~rg:. :ËN'TEK shali produce dö'cllertts: in, response to' these 

requestS. 

,~~j~e,stJios..31. :wid'3:~:!', .i*ri;I( sháirpró:~tièe;,docurefits ~utfcieJit to'show the information, sçught.bry.'these' tè'q:ues'ts., .


''W.~st;::&~'ig9,;;~n~;;1:~¥J~N;~-ÉK; sha1I"pl'ødûdè, ~'bç,YiieÖtstn,resp~nst tÕ.:Uìesbreaiîestii; 

, '


,pfodìJct~~iJ ,~~lff~tm#~;~n c'0~~clf8n wftb''l~ $~ifçh!'Jt~r;a.ë! 

,':',J.LLC 

~ '.. : 

, " ¡',: '.' . "~.;' ~ : ¡ rlI'r~~tf~íj"~

'co: , Iiánp j('$~~~r ' 
erlc O. Welih 

Døcember 22, 2008 

. Pagp5 

LATHAMeiWATKINSL1. 

Disclosure Group Signatures 

Name 

Affliaii()n 

-Date 

''Name 

Affliation 

Date 

:- !" 

Name 

Affliation 

Date. . 

Name 

A.ffliation. 

,Date. 

Name 

Aftliition 

, Date 

Name 

Affliation 

'Date ,. 

. ".