UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUGES

.~ftORIG_1 NAL

&:._~,d, -\,,~ . "u ,/."" ..,ç:'¡::'-'~t\\ 1:~\,aUt Cnj!A~~I'Ii"-~ ..

(~S\,( R2~/J~?(,8/- ~ "

\ J~~~fdj

SECRETARY . f

In the Matter of

)

)

)

)

)

)

POL YPORE INTERNATIONAL, INC., Docket No. 9327

Respondent.

ORDER DENYING MOORE'S MOTION

FOR IN CAMERA TREATMENT

On December 30, 2008, non-party The Moore Company ("Moore") filed a motion for in

camera treatment of material, seeking in camera treatment of its Motion to Limit Subpoena

Duces Tecum and to Seek Cost Reimbursément, which were also filed on December 30, 2008.

Respondent, in its opposition to the motion to limit subpoena, states that it takes no position on

Moore's mption for in camera treatment. Por the reasons set forth below, Moore's motion for in

camera treatment is DENIED.

Moore's motion for in camera treatment does not conform to the Rules. The

Commission's Rules of Practice allow parties and non-parties to seek in camera treatment for

material offered into evidence. 16 C.P.R. § 3.45(b) (emphasis added). Por materials that are not

offered into evidence, the Commission's Rules allow paries and non-parties to file a

confidential version of any document filed in a Part II proceeding that includes information

subject to confidentiality protections pursuant to a protective order. 16 C.P.R. §§ 3.22(b),

3.45(e).

Rule 3.22(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice states "(i)f a pary includes in a

motion information that. . . is subject to confidentiality protections pursuant to a protective

order, the party shall file two versions of the motion in accordance with the procedures set forth

in § 3.45(e). The party shall mark its confidential filings with brackets or similar conspicuous

markings to indicate the material for which it is claiming confidential treatment." 16 C.P.R.

§ 3 .22(b).

Rule 3.45(e) of the Commission's Rules of Practice states "(i)f a party includes specific

information that. . . is subject to confidentiality protections pursuant to a protective order in any

document filed in a proceeding under this par, the party shall file two versions of the document.
A complete version shall be marked 'In Camera' or 'Subject to Protective Order,' as

appropriate, on the first page and shall be filed with the Secretar and served by the party on the

other parties in accordance with the rules in this part. Submitters of in camera or other

confidential material should mark any such material in the complete versions of their

submissions in a conspicuous matter, such as with highlighting or bracketing. . .. An expurgated

version ofthe document, marked 'Public Record' on the first page and omitting the. . .

confidential information and attachment that appear in the complete version, shall be filed with

the Secretar within five (5) days after the filing ofthe complete version. . .. The expurgated

version shall indicate any omissions with brackets or ellipses, and its pagination and depiction of

text on each page shall be identical to that ofthe in camera version." 16 C.P.R. § 3.45(e).

It is ORDERED that Moore's motion for in camera treatment is DENIED because in

camera treatment is improper for material that is not being proffered as evidence for the trial in

this matter.

Moore is further ORDERED to comply with Commission Rules 3.22(b) and 3.45(e) and

submit its motion to limit subpoena as "Subject to Protective Order," rather than as "In Camera."

ORDERED: :: "" ~¡( D. Michael ha ell

Administrative Law Judge

Date: Pebruar 3,2009

2