ORIGINAL 

UNTED STATES OF AMRICA
 

BEFORE THE FEDERA TRAE COMMSSION
 

)
 In the Matter of
 )
 

) Docket No. 9327
 

Polypore International, Inc.
 )
 a corporation. ) PUBLIC
 

) 

NON..PARTYENERSYS' MOTION 
 FOR IN CAMRA TREATMENT
 

OF CERTAI DESIGNATED HEARG EXHITS 

Non-Par EnerSys ("EnerSys") respectflly moves for in camera treatment of 

cert hearng exhbits that either Respondent Polypore International, Inc. ("Respondent") or the
 

Federal Trade Commssion ("FTC") have designated for possible introduction in the 

admstrative hearg in ths matter, scheduled to commence on May 12,2009.1 Each of the 

documents was designated by 
 EnerSys as "CONFIDENTIAL" in accordance with the terms of 

the Protective Order entered by the Cour on October 23,2008.2 These documents conta 

highly confdential and proprieta inormation that is both secret and material to EnerSys' 

present and futue business, public disclosure of which would har EnerSys. 

As a result, EnerSys respectflly requests that the Admistrative Law Judge enter 

an Order pursuat to Rule 3.45(b) of the Federal Trade Commssion Rules of 
 Practice, 16 C.F.R. 

§ 3.45(b), granting in camera treatment for no less than ten (10) years, to the documents listed in 

Exhbit 1 attched to this Motion and the proposed Order.
 

i In view of 
 the Cour's Order dated April 8, 2009, grting the pares' Joint Motion to revise the Scheduling
 

Order, EnerSys does not move for in camera treatment of deposition testimony designated by Respondent but 

respectflly reserves the right to do so if an EnerSys witness is unavailable and the par seekig to designate 

testimony has complied with the Cour's Order. 2 To be precise, EnerSys' first two document productions predated the issuance of 
 the Protective Order but was 

designated confdential nonetheless. In response to a subpoena served by the Federal Trade Commission in 

connection with its investigation, EnerSys produced 837 pages of documents to the FTC in May 2008 with a 

stadard request that they be treated as confidentiaL. The FTC subsequently produced those documents to 

Respondent on the condition that they would be treated as confdential under the Protective Order. 

1 

SLl 913586vl/00844.00930 
In support of ths Motion, EnerSys respectfuly refers the Cour to the 

accompanying Declaration of Lar Axt, Exhbit 2 hereto, and Memorandum of Law. 

Dated: April 9, 2009 STEVENS & LEE, P .C. 

By /!~;(A~


Neil C. Schur 

Eugene V. Lipkowitz 

1818 Market Street, 29t Floor
 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 

(215) 751-1944 

ncsc§stevenslee.com 

evl§stevenslee.com 

2 

SLl 913586vl/00844.00930 
I lrß
 

~
 
---

Exhibits for Which EnerSvs ReQuests In Camera Treatment 

Exhibit	 Exhibit Title 

Number 

RX00206	 Memorandum of Understanding 

between EnerSys Delaware, Inc. 

and Microporous Products, L.P. 

RX00205 Global Supply Agreement 

between EnerSys Capita Inc. and 

Daramc, LLC 

RX00221	 Email Axt to Burkert FW: 

DaramcSumar (2)xls 

RX00223 Email Ayron to Burkert re: PE 

Separator 

RX01205 Email from George Ayron to 

Lar Burkert and Gery Bonduelle
 

RX00214	 Email Gagge to Burkert re Dah 

request 

RX00220	 Economic Assumptions 

RX00242	 Purchasing Outlook 

RX00233	 Daramc/ Amerace 

RX00202 Email re proposal 2008 for 

gauntlets 

RX00228 Email McDonald to Burkert re 

Pricing 

RX00234 Road show presentation used for 

IPO in 2004 

RX00239	 Email alternative source 

RX01206	 E-Mail from George Ayron to 

Lar Axt, John Gagge and Lar 

Burkert 

RXO i 208	 E-Mail from Lar Burkert to John 

Gagge, George Ayron, Jan reber, 

Jason Wallis and Chuck Barlett 

RX00212 Email Barlett, Ayrton, Gagge re 

Folder 

RX00215 Email Gagge to Ayron use of 

PVC and PE manufactung 

RX00216	 Email Gagge to Ayron re use of 

PVC 

RX00222	 Wallis to Burkert re Anpei quote 

RX01012	 Email from Kung to EnerSys 

RX00203 Email, JH International, Inc. to 

EnerSys regarding increased 

Baoding Fengfan 

Rising battery separator company 

capacity of 


1 

Date 

2/1 0/2006 

11/2/2006 

8/20/2008 

6/9/2008 

6/9/2008 

8/19/08 

00/00/2009 

00/00/2009 

11/9/2007 

10/1/2007 

7/00/2004 

6/6/2008 

10/21/2008 

8/13/2008 

11/12/2008 

5/13/2008 

5/13/2008 

10/29/2007 

3/12/2008 

3/12/2008 

BEGDOC ENDDOC 

ENOOOOI ENOOO05 

ENOO052 ENOO062 

ENO 1663 ENO 1665 

EN02371 EN02372 

EN0237 i EN02372 

EN03437 EN03437 

EN040043 EN040045 

EN040043 EN040 163 

EN040674 EN040677 

EN04463 EN04465 

EN05748 EN05751 

EN18267 EN18300 

EN18714 EN18714 

EN19650 EN19652 

EN19700 EN19701 

EN19703 EN19704 

EN19884 EN19885 

EN19886 EN19887 

EN23835 EN23841 

EN24397 EN24409 

EN24405 EN24405 

SLl 914535vl/00844.00930
 
---

---

---

Exhibit 

Number 

Exhibit Title 

RXOO199 

RXOO 197 

RX00235 

RX01203 

EnerSys Daramc Update 

Email regarding Daramc PE 

Update 

EmaIl Kubis to Craig and Axt 

regarding Entek 

US Separator Supply Options 

Char 

RX00200 Email regarding EnerSys data re 

costs to import 

RX01017 Email from Burkert re Daramic 

case 

PX1200 Memorandum of Understading 

between EnerSys and Microporous 

Products LP 

PX1201 EmaIl to Axt from Roe re: Global 

PX1203 

PX1204 

PX1211 

Supply Proposal 

Letter to Axt from Roe re: 

EnerSys Sourcing Decision 

Letter to Axt from Roe re EnerSys 

Worldwide Purchase & Sale 

Agreement 

Letter to Shea et al. from 

Hauswald re: Settlement 

PX1224 

PX1225 

PX1226 

PX1234 

PX1241 

Discussions/Contract Extension 

EnerSys & Daramc Global 

Supply Agreement 

EnerSys Mutual Non-Disclosure 

Agreement 

Microporous Products LP and 

EnerSys Purchase and Supply 

Agreement 

Char: Undated EnerSys Separator 

Requirements and Supply 

Email to Gris from Lipkowitz re: 

EnerSys data re: costs to input 

PX1243 

PX1248 

Daramc/ Amerace Company Ino. 

Email to Burkert from Wallis re: 

PX1249 

Quotation 

Emai1 to Ayrton from Gagge re: 

Light Duty 

2 

Date . 

4/9/2007 

10/9/2006 

8/22/2008 

11/13/2008 

2/10/2006 

5/17/2006 

7/20/2006 

8/11/2006 

10/16/2006 

11/2/2006 

2/10/2006 

1/2/2007 

8/22/2008 

10/29/2007 

5/13/2008 

BEGDOC ENDDOC 

EN24420 

EN26162 

EN24421 

EN26162 

EN26191 EN26192 

FTCENER000121 

FTCENER000218 

FTCENER002298 

ENOOOO 1 

FTCENER000 I 63 

FTCENER000218 

FTCENER002298 

ENOOO05 

ENOOO06 ENOOO07 

ENOOO09 ENOOOll 

ENOOO12 ENOOO 15 

ENOO022 ENOO023 

ENOO052 ENOO062 

ENOO063 ENOO065 

ENOO066 ENOO081 

EN00698 EN00698 

FTCENER000218 

EN040674 

EN23835 

FTCENER000218 

EN040677 

EN23841 

EN19884 EN19885 

sLl 914535vl/00844.00930
 
---

---

---

---

---

Exhibit	 Exhibit Title 

Number 

PX1250 Email to Ayron from Gagge re: 

Light Duty 

PX1256 EnerSys Daramc Update 

PX1259 Business Char 

PX1261 Email to Burkert from Gagge re: 

Separator Cost 

PX1263	 Letter to Axt from Roe re: cost 

increases for Daramic 

polyethylene separator material 

PX1264	 Email to Axt and Burkert from 

Gilchrst re: proposed amendment 

to supply agreement 

PX1265	 Meeting Miutes for MPLP/ 

EnerSys Meeting, Aras, France 

PX1268	 Char: Daramc Cost 

PX1269	 Letter to Axt from Roe re: 

EnerSys Worldwide Purchase & 

Sales Agreement 

PX1270 Email to Evans from Borowski re: 

PVC and MP products 

PX1276 Email to Gagge and Burkert from 

Ayron re: Separator Plant Replies 

PX1279 Email to Ayron from Roe re: 

Request for Deviation 

PX1289	 Letter to Axt from Roe re: 

EnerSys Worldwide Purchase & 

Sales Agreement 

PX1600 Letter to Axt from Roe re EnerSys 

Sourcing Decision 

PX2129 Email to Spease from Ayrton re: 

drawigs for PVC leaf separators 

PX2130	 Email to Hortiales, Maquivar from 

Ayron re: Cell Force leaf 

separators 

PX2132	 Sales Char 

PX2134 Email to Romero from Scherzer 

re: new price for AGM separator 

PX2135 EnerSys Pricing Richmond, KY 

PX2138 Email to Rulis from Lin re: Letter 

Dated October 6, 2006 

3 

Date 

5/13/2008 

5/12/2008 

11/24/2008 

7/17/2007 

5/14/2007 

4/11/2006 

3/7/2008 

10/23/2008 

9/12/2008 

2/26/2006 

7/20/2006 

9/3/2008 

9/24/2008 

1/26/2007 

10/9/2006 

BEGDOC ENDDOC 

EN19886 EN19887 

EN24420 EN24421 

EN03433 EN03435 

EN03406 EN03406 

EN03069 EN03070 

EN03442 EN03442 

EN00470 EN00470 

EN03200 EN03201 

EN032982 EN039285 

EN02754 EN02755 

EN02237 EN02238 

EN02009 EN020 1 0 

EN039279 EN039281 

EN10960 EN 10962 

EN01975 EN01980 

EN02325 EN02340 

EN03142 EN03143 

EN03268 EN03269 

EN03446 EN03446 

EN12887 EN12911 

SLl 914535vl/00844.00930 
ff
 
DECLARATION OF LARY AXT
 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA 

COUNTY OF BERKS 

I, Lar Ax, being duly sworn, depose and make the followi statement:
 

1. I am presently employed as the Vice President, Global Procurement, of
 

EnerSys. 

2. I respectfly submit this Affdavit in support of 
 EnerSys' Motion for In

Camera Treatment of Certn Designated Hearing Exhbits and Deposition Testimony. 

3. The information contained in the documents listed in Exhibit 1 to the
 

Motion ("Subject Documents") is secret, commercialy sensitive, and material to EnerSys' 

cuent and prospective business.
 

4. Each of 
 the Subject Documents has been maintained internaly by EnerSys

in a confdential maner, only being shared with those individuals requig knowledge of the 

information contaned with the document. 

5. The inormation in the Subject Documents was not made available to
 

EnerSys' competitors or other outside persons. 

6. The Subject Documents contan commercially proprieta and confdential
 

inormation regarding EnerSys' pricing, costing, procurement spending, supply of raw materials 

or inputs (in parcular, the polyethylene separators at issue in this case), purchasing outlook, 

plang and strategy, and product techncal detaiL. 

1 

SLl 913586vllOO844.00930
 
7. All of 
 ths informtion is held in strct confdence by EnerSys. 

8. If such inormation were publicly disclosed EnerSys would suffer serious
 

competitive injur because its compettors could use this non-public informtion to their 

advantage and nullify the competitive advantaes gained by EnerSys. 

9. EnerSys' request that in camera treatment for the Subject Documents be
 

maintaed for ten years is reasonable in light of the commercial realities of the commercial 

battery industr. 

10. Contracts typically continue in force for a number of 
 years and are often 

renegotiated and renewed with substantial incorporation of the terms of preceding contracts. 

11. The Subject Documents themselves estalish the frequency of
 

amendments of such contracts and the duration of such contracts. 

12. Product development, and strategies for suppliers, procurement and
 

pricing strategies are often similarly long-term in natue in ths industry. 

13. Under these circumstaces, it is uncertn as to when the documents wil
 

no longer reflect curent pricing and contract terms, or product development and supplier 

strategy and plang. 

14. Moreover, the market is such that even disclosure of terms of contracts no 

longer in force creates an uneasonable and unecessar risk of competitive ha to EnerSys 

such that in camera treatment should extend for a period of at least ten yeas, a reasonable 

2 

SLI 913586vllOO44.00930 
estimate of the minimum length of time for the contracts at issue to expire and their terms to 

become outdated and irrelevant. 

Pusuant to 28 V.S.C. § 1746, I declare under penalty of perjur that the foregoing
 

is true and correct. 

EXECUTED ths %l day of April, 2009. 

3 

SLl 913586vl/00844.00930 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
 

I hereby certify that on April 9, 2009, I filed via overnght courer and electronic mail 

delivery an original and two copies of 
 the foregoing Non-Par EnerSys' Motion for In Camera 

Treatment of Cert Designated Hearg Exhbits and proposed Order with:
 

Donald S. Clark, Secreta 

Offce of the Secreta 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvana Avenue, NW, Rm. H-135 

Washigton, DC 20580
 

secretar§ftc.gov 

I hereby certify that on April 9, 2009, I delivered via overnght courer and electronic 

mail delivery two copies of 
 the foregoing Non-Par EnerSys' Motion for In Camera Treatment 

of Certin Designated Hearg Exhbits and proposed Order to:
 

The Honorable D. Michael Chappell 

Admstrative Law Judge
 

Federal Trade Commssion 

600 Pennylvana Avenue, NW 

Washigton, DC 20580
 

oalj§ftc.gov 

I hereby certify that on April 9, 2009, I served via overnght courer and electronic mail 

Certin 

Designated Hearg Exhbits and proposed Order on: 

delivery a copy of the foregoing Non-Par EnerSys' Motion for In Camera Treatment of 


Eric D. Welsh, Esquire 

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein, LLP 

Thee Wachovia Center 

401 S. Tryon Street, Suite 3000 

Charlotte, NC 28202 

ericwelsh§parkerpoe.com 

Steven A. Dah, Esquire 

Federal Trade Commssion 

Bureau of Competition 

Mergers II Division 

601 New Jersey Avenue, NW 

Washigton, D.C. 20001
 

sdah§ftc.gov 

Date: April 9, 2009 4AY Ag~0­

Neil C. Schur 

SLl 913586vll00844.00930
 
UNITED STATES OF AMRICA
 

BEFORE THE FEDERA TRAE COMMSSION
 

)

In the Matter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327 

Polypore International, Inc. )

a corporation. ) PUBLIC 

) 

NON-PARTY ENERSYS' MEMORAUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF 

MOTION FOR IN CAMERA TREATMENT

OF CERTAI DESIGNATED HEARG EXlBITS 

I. Introduction'
 

Non-Par EnerSys ("EnerSys") respectflly submits ths Memorandum of Law in 

support of its motion for in camera treatment of cert hearg exhbits that either Respondent 

Polypore International, Inc. ("Respondent") or the Federal Trade Commssion ("FTC") have 

designated for possible introduction in the admstrative hearg in ths matter, scheduled to 

commence on May 12,2009. 

A listing and description of the documents for which EnerSys seeks in camera 

treatment ("Subject Documents") is attched to EnerSys' Motion as Exhbit 1. (The documents 

themselves are submitted in a separate version of Exhbit 1 to the Cour only for in camera 

1 Each of 


review). the Subject Documents was designated "CONFIDENTIA" under the 

October 23, 2008 Protective Order entered by the Cour? The inormation contaed in the 

i EnerSys does not concede that all of the exhibits listed thereon and provided to the Cour are proper exhibits. A 

number of 
 them contain multiple documents that may not be related and are not a single document. EnerSys 

preserves its right to object to the introduction ofthese exhibits on this and any other proper basis and does not 

waive any such objections by solely focusing on confidentiality herein. 

2 To be precise, EnerSys' fist two document productions predated the issuance of 
 the Protective Order but was 

designated confidential nonetheless. In response to a subpoena served by the Federal Trade Commission in 

connection with its investigation, EnerSys produced 837 pages of documents to the FTC in May 2008 with a 

stadard request that they be treated as confdentiaL. The FTC subsequently produced those documents to 

Respondent on the condition that they would be treated as confdential under the Protective Order. 

1 

SLl 913586vll00844.00930
 
Subject Documents is secret, commercially sensitive, and material to EnerSys' curent and 

prospective business. 

As a result, EnerSys respectfly requests that the Adminstrative Law Judge enter 

an Order pursuat to Rule 3.45(b) of the Federal Trade Commssion Rules of 
 Practice, 16 C.F.R. 

§ 3.45(b), granting in camera treatment for no less than ten (10) years, to the Subject Documents 

listed in Exhbit 1 attched to EnerSys' Motion and the proposed Order submitted herewith. 

II. Standard for In Camera Treatment 

Materials merit in camera treatment when their public disclosure of the 

documents "will result in a clearly defied, serious injur to the person or corporation whose 

records are involved." HP. Hood & Sons, Inc., 58 F.T.C. 1184, 1188 (1961). Such serious 

injur can be established by showig that the inormation at issue is "sufciently secret and 

sufciently material to the applicant's business that disclosure would result in serious
 

competitive injur." In re General Foods Corp., 95 F.T.C. 352, 355 (1980); In the Matter 0/
 

Bristol Meyers Co., 90 F.T.C. 455, 456 (1977). 

The followig factors should be weighed in considerig both secrecy and 

materiality: (1) the extent to which the inormation is known outside the applicant's business; 

(2) the extent to which the inormation is known by employees and others involved in the 

applicant's business; (3) the extent of measures taen by the applicant to guad the secrecy of the 

inormation; (4) the value of 
 the inormation to the applicant and its competitors; (5) the amount 

of effort or money expended by the applicant in developing the inormation; and (6) the ease or 

diffculty with which the inormation could be properly acquired or duplicated by others. In the 

Matter o/Bristol Meyers Co., 90 F.T.C. at 456. 

A showig of injur may consist of extrsic evidence or, in certin instaces, 

may be inferred from the natue of the documents themselves. In the Matter 0/ E.l Dupont 

2 SLl 913586vll00844.00930
 
de Nemours & Co., 97 F.T.C. 116 (1981). Admstrative law judges have broad discretion in 

applying these factors to determe whether inormation warants in camera treatment. See In re 

General Foods Corp., 95 F.T.C. 352 (1980). Moreover, the Commssion has stated that a 

request for in camera treatment by a non-par company to the FTC proceeding (such as 

EnerSys) should be given "special solicitude." In re Crown Cork & Seal Co., 71 F.T.C. 1714 

(1967) ("(P)etitioner's plea warants special solicitude comig as it does from a thd-par 

bystader in no way involved in the proceedings whose records, if in camera treatment is denied, 

will be open to the scrutiny of its competitors"); accord Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp., 

103 F.T.C. 500 (1984) (requests for in camera treatment by thd paries should be given special 

solicitude because, as a policy matter, such treatment encourages the thd par to cooperate 

with futue adjudicative discovery requests).
 

III. The Subiect Documents Meet the Standard for In Camera Treatment 

Each of 
 the Subject Documents has been maintaed internally by EnerSys in a 

confdential maner, only being shared with those individuals requirg knowledge of the 

inormation contaed with the document. The inormation was not made available to
 

EnerSys' competitors or other outside persons. As such, when legally compelled to produce the 

inormation under subpoena, the Subject Documents were designated "CONFIDENTIAL" in 

accordance with the terms of 
 the Protective Order. 

EnerSys respectfully submits that in camera treatment is waranted for the 

Subject Documents because (1) EnerSys will sufer serious competitive har if 
 the Subject 

Documents are disclosed to the public; (2) the inormation contaned in the Subject Documents is 

secret; and (3) the risk of har is not outweighed by the importce ofthe inormation to the
 

matter decided by the Commssion. 

3 

SLl 913586vll0084.00930 
As set fort in the Declaration of Lar Axt, attched to EnerSys' Motion as
 

Exhbit 2, the Subject Documents contain commercially proprieta and confdential inormation
 

regarding EnerSys' pricing, costing, procurement spending, supply of 
 raw materials or inputs (in 

paricular, the polyethylene separators at issue in ths case), purchasing outlook, plang and 

strategy, and product techncal detaiL. All of 
 ths inormation is held in strct confdence by 

EnerSys. If such inormation were publicly disclosed, EnerSys would sufer serious competitive 

injur because its competitors could use ths non-public inormation to their advantage and
 

nullfy the competitive advantages gaied by EnerSys. In addition, EnerSys is a publicly traded 

company, and the public disclosure of 
 ths confdential non-public inormation may improperly 

and unecessarly inuence both stock prices and investor confdence, causing fuer har to
 

EnerSys. 

Moreover, as a non-par seekig in camera treatment for its confdential business 

inormation, EnerSys' request should be treated with "special solicitude." In the Matter of 

Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation, 103 F.T.C. 500 (1984) (order directing in camera 

treatment for sales statistics over five years old). Reasonable periods of in camera treatment 

encourage non-paries to cooperate with futue discovery requests in adjudicative proceedings. 

Id. At great expense, EnerSys has cooperated with the discovery demands of both paries to ths
 

case, producing tens of thousands of 
 pages of documents and four witnesses for deposition (two 

of whom were also separately examed under oath in connection with the FTC's investigation 

of the facts of ths matter). The Subject Documents have been made available - at substatial 

cost to EnerSys - for use by the FTC and Respondent in accordance with the terms of the 

Protective Order. 

4 

SLl 913586vl/00844.00930 
at issue in this case), procures its raw materials, and negotiates, strctues and retans its 

contractu and business relationships with suppliers. Disclosure ofthe Subject Documents 

would result in a clearly defied serious injur to EnerSys. Accordingly, for the reasons set fort 

above and in the Declaration of Lar Axt, Exhbit 2 to EnerSys' Motion, EnerSys respectflly 

requests that ths Cour grant its motion directing in camera treatment for the Subject 

Documents.
 

Dated: April 9, 2009 STEVENS & LEE, P.C.
 

By /~)f,A~
 

Neil C. Schur 

Eugene V. Lipkowitz 

1818 Market Street, 29t Floor
 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvana 19103 

(215) 751-1944 

ncsc§stevenslee.com 

evl§stevenslee.com 

6 

SLl 913586vll0084.00930 
UNTED STATES OF AMRICA
 

BEFORE THE FEDERA TRAE COMMSSION
 

) In the Matter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327

Polypore International, Inc. )


a corporation.
 ) 

) 

ORDER 

Upon consideration of the motion of EnerSys for in camera treatment of cert
 

designated hearg exhbits, it is hereby ordered that the Motion is GRATED, and the 

documents identified on Exhbit 1 of EnerSys' Motion, which is attched hereto, shall be 

aforded in camera treatment pursuat to Rule 3.45(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Rules 

of Practice, 16 C.F.R. § 3.45(b) for ten (10) years from the date of ths Order. 

ENTER: 

Dated: April _, 2009 

Adminstrative Law Judge D. Michael Chappell 

SLl 913586vll00844.00930 
---

Exhibits for Which EnerSvs ReQuests In Camera Treatment 

Exhibit Exhibit Title 

Number 

RX00206	 Memorandum of Understanding 

between EnerSys Delaware, Inc. 

and Microporous Products, L.P. 

RX00205 Global Supply Agreement 

between EnerSys Capital Inc. and 

Daramc, LLC 

RX00221	 Email Axt to Burkert FW: 

DaramcSumar (2)xls 

RX00223 Email Ayron to Burkert re: PE 

Separator 

RX01205 Email from George Ayron to 

Lar Burkert and Gery Bonduelle
 

RX00214	 EmaIl Gagge to Burkert re Dah 

request 

RX00220	 Economic Assumptions 

RX00242	 Purchasing Outlook 

RX00233	 Daramc/ Amerace 

RX00202 Email re proposal 2008 for 

gauntlets 

RX00228 Email McDonald to Burkert re 

Pricing 

RX00234 Road show presentation used for 

IPO in 2004 

RX00239	 Email alternative source 

RX01206	 E-Mail from George Ayron to 

Lar Axt, John Gagge and Lar 

Burkert 

RXO 1208	 E-Mail from Lar Burkert to John 

Gagge, George Ayron, Jan reber, 

Jason Wallis and Chuck Barlett 

RX00212	 Email Barlett, Ayron, Gagge re 

Folder 

RX00215	 Email Gagge to Ayron use of 

PVC and PE manufactung 

RX00216	 Email Gagge to Ayron re use of 

PVC 

RX00222	 Wallis to Burkert re Anpei quote 

RX01012	 Email from Kung to EnerSys 

RX00203	 Email, JH International, Inc. to 

EnerSys regarding increased 

capacity of Baoding Fengfan 

Rising battery separator company 

1 

Date 

2/1 0/2006 

11/2/2006 

8/20/2008 

6/9/2008 

6/9/2008 

8/19/08 

00/00/2009 

00/00/2009 

11/9/2007 

10/1/2007 

7/00/2004 

6/6/2008 

10/21/2008 

8/13/2008 

11/12/2008 

5/13/2008 

5/13/2008 

10/29/2007 

3/12/2008 

3/12/2008 

BEGDOC ENDDOC 

ENOOOOI ENOOO05 

ENOO052 ENOO062 

ENO 1663 EN01665 

EN02371 EN02372 

EN02371 EN02372 

EN03437 EN03437 

EN040043 EN040045 

EN040043 EN040163 

EN040674 EN040677 

EN04463 EN04465 

EN05748 EN05751 

EN18267 EN18300 

EN18714 EN18714 

EN19650 EN19652 

EN19700 EN19701 

EN19703 EN19704 

EN19884 EN19885 

EN19886 EN19887 

EN23835 EN23841 

EN24397 EN24409 

EN24405 EN24405 

SLl 914535vl/00844.00930 
Exhibit Exhibit Title Date BEGDOc ENDDOc 

Number 

RXOO199 EnerSys Daramc Update --­ EN24420 EN24421 

RXOO 197 Email regardmg Darmmc PE 4/9/2007 EN26162 EN26162 

Update 

RX00235 Email Kubis to Craig and Axt 10/9/2006 EN26191 EN26192 

regarding Entek 

RX01203 US Separator Supply Options FTC­ FTCChar ENER­ ENER000121 000163 

RX00200 Email regarding EnerSys data re 8/22/2008 FTC­ FTCcosts to import ENER­ ENER000218 000218 

RXOI017 Email from Burkert re Daramc 11/13/2008 FTC­ FTCcase ENER­ ENER002298 002298 

PX1200 Memorandum of Understanding 2/10/2006 ENOOOOI ENOOO05 

between EnerSys and Microporous 

Products LP 

PX1201 Email to Axt from Roe re: Global 5/17/2006 ENOOO06 ENOOO07 

Supply Proposal 

PX1203 Letter to Axt from Roe re: 7/20/2006 ENOOO09 ENOOO 11 

EnerSys Sourcmg Decision 

PX1204 Letter to Axt from Roe re EnerSys 8/11/2006 ENOOO12 ENOOO 15 

Worldwide Purchase & Sale 

Agreement 

PX1211 Letter to Shea et al. from 10/16/2006 ENOO022 ENOO023 

Hauswald re: Settlement 

Discussions/Contract Extension 

PX1224 EnerSys & Daramc Global 11/2/2006 ENOO052 ENOO062 

Supply Agreement 

PX1225 EnerSys Mutu Non-Disclosure 2/10/2006 ENOO063 ENOO065 

Agreement 

PX1226 Microporous Products LP and 1/2/2007 ENOO066 ENOO081 

EnerSys Purchase and Supply 

Agreement 

PX1234 Char: Undated EnerSys Separator --­ EN00698 EN00698 

Requirements and Supply 

PX1241 Email to Ors from Lipkowitz re: 8/22/2008 FTC­ FTCEnerSys data re: costs to mput ENER­ ENER000218 000218 

PX1243 Daramc/ Amerace Company Ino. --­ EN040674 EN040677 

PX1248 Email to Burkert from Walls re: 10/2912007 EN23835 EN23841 

Quotation 

PX1249 Email to Ayrton from Gagge re: 5/13/2008 EN19884 EN19885 

Light Duty 

2 

SLl 914535vll00844.00930 
Exhibit Exhibit Title Date BEGDOC ENDDOc 

Number 

PX1250 Email to Ayrton from Gagge re: 5/13/2008 EN19886 EN19887 

Light Duty 

PX1256 EnerSys Daramic Update --­ EN24420 EN24421 

PX1259 Business Char --­ EN03433 EN03435 

PX1261 Email to Burkert from Gagge re: 5/12/2008 EN03406 EN03406 

Separator Cost 

PX1263 Letter to Axt from Roe re: cost 11/24/2008 EN03069 EN03070 

increases for Daramic 

polyethylene separator material 

PX1264 Email to Axt and Burkert from 7/17/2007 EN03442 EN03442 

Gilchrst re: proposed amendment 

to supply agreement 

PX1265 Meeting Minutes for MPLP/ 5/14/2007 EN00470 EN00470 

EnerSys Meeting, Aras, France 

PX1268 Char: Daramic Cost --­ EN03200 EN03201 

PX1269 Letter to Axt from Roe re: 4/1112006 EN032982 EN039285 

EnerSys Worldwide Purchase & 

Sales Agreement 

PX1270 Email to Evans from Borowski re: 3/7/2008 EN02754 EN02755 

PVC and MP products 

PX1276 Email to Gagge and Burkert from 10/23/2008 EN02237 EN02238 

Ayron re: Separator Plant Replies 

PX1279 Email to Ayron from Roe re: 9/12/2008 EN02009 EN020 1 0 

Request for Deviation 

PX1289 Letter to Axt from Roe re: 2/26/2006 EN039279 EN039281 

EnerSys Worldwide Purchase & 

Sales Agreement 

PX1600 Letter to Axt from Roe re EnerSys 7/20/2006 EN10960 EN10962 

Sourcing Decision 

PX2129 Email to Spease from Ayrton re: 9/3/2008 EN01975 ENO 1980 

drawigs for PVC leaf separators 

PX2130 Email to Hortiales, Maquivar from 9/24/2008 EN02325 EN02340 

Ayron re: Cell Force leaf 

separators 

PX2132 Sales Char --­ EN03142 EN03143 

PX2134 Email to Romero from Scherzer 1/26/2007 EN03268 EN03269 

re: new price for AGM separator 

PX2135 EnerSys Pricing Richmond, KY --­ EN03446 EN03446 

PX2138 Email to Rulis from Lin re: Letter 10/9/2006 EN12887 EN12911 

Dated October 6, 2006 

3 

SLl 914535vl/0084.00930