ORfGI~'AJ 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
 

óZ;¡7Ò~ 5 

In the Matter of ) 

f~ g)~ 

Polypore International, Inc., 

a corporation. 

) 

) 

) Docket No. 9327 

) 

) PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

) 

) 

) 

RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARING 

TESTIMONY OF PHILLIP BRYSON 

Pursuant to the Federal Trade Commission's Rules of Practice for Adjudicative 

Proceedings ("FTC Rules") 16 C.F.R. §§ 3.22 and 3.31 (d), Respondent Polypore International, 

Inc. ("Polypore"), by its attorneys, Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP, hereby moves for a 

protective order to prohibit Complaint Counsel from taking the deposition of Philip Bryson, 

Respondent's General Counsel, in advance of the hearing scheduled for November 4,2009, and 

prohibiting Complaint Counsel from callng Mr. Bryson as a witness at the hearing. In support 

of its motion, Respondent states as follows: 

1. By its Order Granting Respondent's Second Motion to Reopen the Hearing
 

Record and Setting Hearing Schedule (the "Order"), this Court granted only limited discovery of 

Respondent's proffered evidence. In that regard, the Court ordered that depositions could be 

taken prior to October 27,2009, but "limited to individuals to be called at the hearing and limited 

to the proffered evidence." Order, p. 7. 

2. The Order limits the evidence which can be proffered in the re-opened hearing to
 

the following four topics: 

1619583v! 
· After the close of the record, Exide decided to move ( 1 its
 

PE separator purchases for ( 1 to another supplier, and in 

the span of less than three months, Exide has placed orders from Daramic 

in excess of ( 1 of PE separators, all requested to be
 

delivered by year end. This amount exceeds any reasonable forecast 

provided by Exide, is inconsistent with past order patterns and, based on 

Exide's ( 1, amounts to approximately ( 1
 

worth of PE separator 
 ( s). Douglas Gilespie of Exide has admitted to 

Respondent that Exide' s recent purchase orders equate to ( 1
 

worth of PE separator purchases from Daramic. 

· With Exide's purchase orders for more than ( 1 of PE
 

separators from Daramic, Exide does not intend to and wil not purchase 

any additional PE separators from Daramic in either ( 1.
 

. In light of Exide's apparent decision not to purchase PE separators from
 · 1.
 Daramic in ( J, Daramic wil 
 likely have to (

. If Daramic is able to retain any small amount of business from Exide in
 

· ( J, or thereafter, which appears unlikely, Daramic wil only be able to
 

obtain such sales through a ( 1.
 

3. In a conference call between counsel for Respondent and Complaint Counsel on
 

Monday, October 19,2009, Respondent advised Complaint Counsel that it would call only three 

witnesses at the hearing: Mr. Robert Toth, Mr. Harry Seibert and Mr. Douglas Gilespie of 

Exide Technologies. Each of those witnesses was identified previously by Respondent in its 

Second Motion to Reopen the Hearing Record. Respondent does not intend to call Mr. Bryson 

as a witness. 

4. In seeking to re-open the record and present evidence at a half-day hearing,
 

Respondent is mindful of the evidence already before this Court. Respondent does not seek to 

unnecessarily burden the Court with information regarding its proffer and believes that the 

evidence can be presented efficiently in the time allotted by the Court through the exhibits and 

testimony of Messrs. Toth, Seibert and Gilespie. Mr. Bryson's testimony would add nothing to 

2 

161 9583v 1
 
the evidence and, at best, would be cumulative of the evidence to be presented through the 

testimony of Robert Toth, Harr Seibert and Douglas Gilespie. In addition, the deposition 

would more than likely stray into matters covered by the attorney-client privilege which could 

then lead to further motion practice before this Court. Finally, there is simply no justification for 

deposing Mr. Bryson since Respondent wil not call him as a witness at the hearing, and opposes 

any effort by Complaint Counsel to do so. In light of 
 these facts, Complaint Counsel's noticing 

Mr. Bryson's deposition is improper for the intended purpose of annoyance, harassment, undue 

burden, and increased expense and to preoccupy Respondent with this motion practice rather 

than preparing for the hearing which is scheduled to occur in two weeks. 

5. Pursuant to Rule 3.31 (d), the Administrative Law Judge may deny discovery or
 

make any order to protect "any party . . . from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue 

burden and expense. . ." FTC Rules 3.31(d). 

CONCLUSION 

For the foregoing reasons, Respondent respectfully requests that this Court grant its 

motion and enter a protective order to prohibit Complaint Counsel from taking the deposition of 

Philip Bryson, Esq. or calling Mr. Bryson as a witness at the hearing. 

3 

1619583vl 
Dated: October 23,2009 Respectfully Submitted, 

£~ w-U I~ew
 

Wiliam L. Rikard, Jr. 

Eric D. Welsh 

PARKER POE ADAMS & BERNSTEIN LLP 

Three Wachovia Center 

401 South Tryon Street, Suite 3000 

Charlotte, NC 28202 

Telephone: (704) 372-9000 

Facsimile: (704) 334-4706 

williamrikard~parkerpoe.com 

ericwelsh~parkerpoe.com 

John F. Graybeal 

PARKR POE ADAMS & BERNSTEIN LLP 

150 Fayettevile Street
 

Raleigh, NC 27602 

Telephone: (919) 835-4599 

Facsimile: (919) 828-0564 

iohngraybeal~parkerpoe.com 

Attorneys for Respondent 

4
 

1619583vl 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
 

In the Matter of ) Docket No. 9327 

) 

) 

Polypore International, Inc. 

a corporation 

) 

) 

) PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

) 

STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SCHEDULING ORDER 

I, Eric D. Welsh, Esq., on behalf of Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP ("Parker Poe") 

as counsel for Polypore International, Inc. ("Polypore"), hereby represent that Parker Poe has 

conferred with Complaint Counsel in an effort in good faith to resolve by agreement the issues 

raised by Respondent's Motion for Protective Order Regarding Deposition of Phillp Bryson, and 

has been unable to reach such an agreement. 

Parker Poe and Complaint Counsel discussed these issues by telephone on October 19, 

2009. During this call, I was present for Parker Poe and 1. Robert Robertson, Esq., was present 

for Complaint Counsel. As a result of this discussion, it was concluded that Polypore and 

Complaint Counsel were at an impasse with respect to the issues raised in the instant Motion. 

Dated: October 23, 2009 Respectfully Submitted, 

£- W.J Itlt-


Eric D. Welsh 

PARKER POE ADAMS & BERNSTEIN, LLP 

Three Wachovia Center 

401 South Tryon Street, Suite 3000 

Charlotte, NC 28202 

Telephone: (704) 372-9000 

Facsimile: (704) 335-9689 

ericwelsh~parkerpoe.co 

1619583vl 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
 

In the Matter of ) Docket No. 9327

Polypore International, Inc., ) 

a corporation. ) PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

) 

PROPOSED ORDER 

This matter is before the Court on Respondent's Motion for a Protective Order Regarding 

the Testimony of 
 Philip Bryson. For good cause shown, the Court hereby GRANTS Respondent's 

Motion and enters a protective order prohibiting Complaint Counsel from taking the deposition of 

Philip Bryson, Esq. in advance of the hearing scheduled for November 4, 2009, and further 

prohibiting Complaint Counsel from callng Mr. Bryson as a witness at the hearing. 

This the _ day of 
 October, 2009. 

The Honorable D. Michael Chappell 

Chief Administrative Law Judge 

PPAB 1619583vl 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
 

I hereby certify that on October 23, 2009, I caused to be fied via hand delivery and 

electronic mail delivery an original and two copies of the foregoing Motion for Protective Order 

Regarding Testimony of Phillp Bryson ¡PublicI 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 fied 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 October 23, 2009, I caused to be served one copy via electronic 

mail delivery and two copies via overnight mail delivery of the foregoing Motion for Protective 

Order Regarding Testimony of Phillp Bryson ¡PublicI upon: 

The Honorable D. Michael Chappell
 

Administrative Law Judge
 

Federal Trade Commission
 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
 

Washington, DC 20580
 

I hereby certify that on October 23,2009, I caused to be served via first-class mail delivery 

and electronic mail delivery a copy of the foregoing Motion for Protective Order Regarding 

Testimony of Phillp Bryson ¡PublicI 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 sdah~ftc.gov 

Adam C. Shearer 

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP 

Three Wachovia Center 

401 South Tryon Street, Suite 3000 

Charlotte, NC 28202 

Telephone: (704) 372-9000 

Facsimile: (704) 334-4706 

PPAB 1619583vl