__________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

09 17 2012 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES
 

) 

In the Matter of ) PUBLIC 

) 

McWANE, INC., ) DOCKET NO. 9351 

Respondent. ) 

__________________________________________) 

COMPLAINT COUNSEL’S MOTION FOR IN CAMERA TREATMENT OF 

WITNESS TELEPHONE RECORDS 

Pursuant to Rule 3.45(b) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and the 

Scheduling Order entered in this matter, Complaint Counsel hereby requests that the 

Court grant in camera treatment of telephone records in evidence at CX 1618-A, CX 

1621-A, CX 1624-A, CX 1625-A, CX 1626-A, and CX 1860-A (collectively, “Phone 

Records”), which are attached hereto at Tabs 1 through 6.1 

BACKGROUND 

In response to Complaint Counsel’s April 26, 2012 subpoenas duces tecum, 

Verizon Legal Compliance and Verizon Wireless (collectively, “Verizon”) submitted 

Phone Records for the business phone numbers of certain employees of McWane, Inc. 

and Sigma Corp. for the period of January 1, 2007 through May 2, 2012. Complaint 

Counsel has redacted the attached Phone Records to reflect the call histories, to the extent 

available, between key executives from McWane, Sigma and Star Pipe Products Ltd. 

(“Star”). Specifically: CX 1860-A contains the call log for Lawrence Rybacki’s office 

and assistant’s phone lines; CX 1618-A contains the business cell phone call log for 

1

 Complaint Counsel previously marked unredacted versions of these same exhibits as CX 1618, CX 1621, 

CX 1624, CX 1625, CX 1626, and CX 1860. The “-A” suffix documents attached to this motion and 

described above redact all irrelevant phone numbers, and are the versions that Complaint Counsel intends 

to introduce into evidence at these proceedings. 
 

Thomas Brakefield; CX 1621-A contains the business cell phone call log for Larry 

PUBLIC

Rybacki; CX 1624-A contains the business cell phone call log for Mitchell Rona; CX 

1625-A contains the business cell phone call log for Matt Minameyer; and, CX 1626-A 

contains the business cell phone call log for Jerry Jansen. These Phone Records would 

not be available to the public absent a subpoena. 

ARGUMENT 

Because the Phone Records contain sensitive personal information under Rule 

3.45(b), this Court should grant in camera treatment for all Phone Records for a period of 

ten years. Rule 3.45(b) of the Federal Trade Commission’s Rules of Practice explicitly 

allows for in camera treatment of evidence that “constitutes sensitive personal 

information.” 16 C.F.R. § 3.45(b). Sensitive personal information under Rule 3.45(b) 

includes numbers and records “identifiable by individual.” Id. On September 14, 2012, 

this Court “determined that phone records, especially those that are subpoenaed, 

constitute sensitive personal information under the FTC Rules.” Sept. 14, 2012 Rough 

Tr. at 270. 

Under Rule 3.45(b)’s definition, and this Court’s September 14, 2012 finding, the 

Phone Records constitute sensitive personal information eligible for in camera treatment. 

The Phone Records list phone calls to and from specific employees of McWane, Sigma 

and Star, and are thus identifiable by individual. See 16 C.F.R. § 3.45(b). Additionally, 

this Court’s September 14, 2012 finding regarding sensitive personal information 

explicitly references one of the Phone Records produced pursuant to subpoena in this 

case and at issue in this motion, CX 1621. See Sept. 14, 2012 Rough Tr. at 270 

2
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

PUBLIC

(describing the unredacted exhibit shown to Lawrence Rybacki during his September 7, 

2012 testimony). 

Because the Phone Records pertain to McWane’s and non-parties’ currently 

active telephone numbers, this Court should extend in camera treatment for these Phone 

Records to ten years. While in camera treatment generally does not extend beyond three 

years, the Commission grants longer in camera treatment to materials that are not 

“ordinary business records.” See In re: H. P. Hood & Sons, 58 F.T.C. 1184, 1189 (1961) 

(describing customer names, or profit and loss documents as ordinary business 

documents and distinguishing these from technical secrets). Phone records are not 

ordinary business records, and the sensitivity of the information that they contain is 

ongoing, and thus entitled to protection for a period of ten years. 

CONCLUSION 

For the reasons stated above, Complaint Counsel asks this Court to grant in 

camera treatment to the Phone Records for a period of ten years. 

Dated: September 17, 2012 Respectfully submitted, 

 s/ Edward Hassi 

Edward Hassi, Esq. 

Linda Holleran, Esq. 

Thomas H. Brock, Esq. 

Michael J. Bloom, Esq. 

Jeanine K. Balbach, Esq. 

J. Alexander Ansaldo, Esq. 

Andrew K. Mann, Esq.

 Monica M. Castillo, Esq. 

Counsel Supporting the Complaint 

 Bureau of Competition

 Federal Trade Commission

 Washington, DC 20580 

3
 
 

 Telephone: (202) 326-2470 

 Facsimile: (202) 326-3496 

Electronic Mail: ehassi@ftc.gov
 

PUBLIC

4
__________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES
 

PUBLIC

) 

In the Matter of ) 

) 

McWANE, INC., ) DOCKET NO. 9351 

Respondent. ) 

__________________________________________) 

(Proposed) ORDER 

After reviewing Complaint Counsel’s Motion for In Camera Treatment for 

Witness Telephone Records, it is ordered that in camera status is hereby GRANTED for 

a period of 10 years, ending on September 1, 2022, for the following documents: CX 

1618-A, CX 1621-A, CX 1624-A, CX 1625-A, CX 1626-A, and CX 1860-A. 

ORDERED: _____________________________ 

 D. Michael Chappell

 Chief Administrative Law Judge 

Date: September 17, 2012 

5
 
 

 

 

 

PUBLIC

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on September 17, 2012, I filed the foregoing document 

electronically using the FTC’s E-Filing System, which will send notification of such 

filing to: 

Donald S. Clark 

Secretary 

 Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 

 Washington, DC 20580 

 I also certify that I delivered via electronic mail and hand delivery a copy of the 

foregoing document to: 

The Honorable D. Michael Chappell 

 Administrative Law Judge 

 Federal Trade Commission 

 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Rm. H-110 

 Washington, DC 20580 

 I further certify that I delivered via electronic mail a copy of the foregoing 

document to: 

Joseph A. Ostoyich 

William C. Lavery 

Baker Botts L.L.P. 

The Warner 

1299 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 

Washington, DC 20004 

(202) 639-7700 

joseph.ostoyich@bakerbotts.com 

william.lavery@bakerbotts.com 

J. Alan Truitt 

Thomas W. Thagard III 

Maynard Cooper and Gale PC 

1901 Sixth Avenue North 

2400 Regions Harbert Plaza 

Birmingham, AL 35203 

(205) 254-1000 

atruitt@maynardcooper.com 

tthagard@maynardcooper.com 

Counsel for Respondent McWane, Inc. 
 

 

 

 

 

PUBLIC

Matthew A. White 

Ballard Spahr LLP

 1735 Market Street, 51st Floor 

 Philadelphia, PA 19103-7599 

(215) 864-8849 

whitema@ballardspahr.com 

Counsel for Sigma Corporation 

CERTIFICATE FOR ELECTRONIC FILING 

 I certify that the electronic copy sent to the Secretary of the Commission is a true 

and correct copy of the paper original and that I possess a paper original of the signed 

document that is available for review by the parties and the adjudicator. 

September 17, 2012 By: s/ Thomas H. Brock 

Attorney 
 

PUBLIC

TAB 1 

CX 1618-A 
 

PUBLIC

TAB 2 

CX 1621-A 
 

PUBLIC

TAB 3 

CX 1624-A 
 

PUBLIC

TAB 4 

CX 1625-A 
 

PUBLIC

TAB 5 

CX 1626-A 
PUBLIC

TAB 6 

CX 1860-A