PUBLIC ORIGINAL 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERA TRAE COMMISSION 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES 

In the Matter of 

Ardagh Group S.A., 

a public limited liabilty company, and 

PUBLIC 

DOCKET NO. 9356 

Compagnie de Saint-Gobain, a corporation, 

and 

Saint-Gobain Container~, Inc., 

a corporation. 

COMPLAINT COUNSEL'S REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS 

TO RESPONDENTS COMPAGNIE DE SAINT -GOBAIN AND 

SAINT-GOBAIN CONTAINERS, INC. 

Pursuant to the Federal Trade Commission's Rules of 
 Practice, 16 C.F.R. § 3.32, and the 

Definitions and Instructions set forth below, Complaint Counsel hereby requests that 

Respondents Compagnie De Saint-Gobain and Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc. admit within ten 

(10) days the following: 

the top 25 U.S. craft brewers (based on 2012 beer sales volume) 

package their beer in glass containers. 

1. Admit that all of 


2. Admit that, in 2006, less than t L of the gross output, measured by unit sales, from 

the Company's plant in Lincoln, IL was spirits bottles. 

3. Admit that, in 2007, less than t L of the gross output, measured by unit sales, from
 

the Company's plant in Lincoln, IL was spirits bottles. 

4. Admit that the Company bid to supply (through an informal or formal bid), either directly 

öì thíöugh a disnibutöì, t J Böii ~eölipaiiy'S plant in
 

Sapulpa, Oklahoma in 2012. 

5. Admit that the Company bid to supply (through an informal or formal bid), either directly 

or through a distributor, t L from the Company's plant in
 

Burlington, Wisconsin in 2011. 

6. Admit that craft beer bottles and mass beer bottles can be manufactured in the same plant. 

1 
PUBLIC 

7. Admit that craft beer bottles and mass beer bottles can be manufactured using the same 

furnace and same individual setting machine. 

8. Admit that the Company bid to supply (through an informal or formal bid) t 

lin 2009.
 

9. Admit that the Company bid to supply (through an informal or formal bid) t 

lin 2012.
 

10. Admit that the Company bid to supply (through an informal or formal bid) t 

lin 2013.
 

11. Admit that the Company bid to supply (through an informal or formal bid), either directly or through a distributor, t L in 2012. 

12. Admit that the Company bid to supply (through an informal or formal bid), either directly 

or through a distributor, t lin 2013.


13. Admit that the Company bid to supply (through an informal or formal bid), either directly 

or through a distributor, t L in 2010. 

14. Admit that the Company bid to supply (through an informal or formal bid), either directly 

or through a distributor, t lin 2012.
 

15. Admit that the Company bid to supply (through an informal or formal bid), either directly 

or through a distributor, t lin 2012.
 

16. Admit that the Company bid to supply (through an informal or formal bid), either directly or through a distributor, t L in 2012. 

17. Admit that the Company bid to supply (through an informal or formal bid), either directly 

or through a distributor, t lin 2009.
 

18. Admit that the capital investment needed to construct a new glass container 

manufacturing facility in the u.s. is at least $150-$200 millon. 

2
 
PUBLIC
 

DEFINITIONS 

1. The terms "Compagnie de Saint-Gobain," "the Company," "you," or "your" mean 

Compagnie de Saint-Gobain, its domestic and foreign parents, predecessors, divisions, 

subsidiaries, affiiates, parterships, and joint ventures, and all directors, offcers, 

employees, agents, and representatives of the foregoing. The terms "subsidiary,"
 

"affiiate," and "joint venture" refer to any person in which there is partial (i.e., 25 

percent or more) or total ownership or control between the Company and any other 

person. 

2. The terms "craft beer," "craft brewery," and "mass beer" have the same meaning as used 

in the Expert Report of 
 Dr. Chetan Sanghvi fied in Federal Trade Commission v. Ardagh 

Group S.A., Civil Action NO.1 :13-cv-Ol021 (RMC) filed in District Court for the 

District of Columbia on September 4, 2013. 

INSTRUCTIONS 

1. Provide separate and complete sworn written responses for each Request for Admission 

("Request") . 

2. Your answers to any Request must include all information within your possession, 

custody, or 
 control, including information reasonably available to you and your agents, 

attorneys, or representatives. You may not give lack of information or knowledge as a 

reason for failure to admit or deny unless you state that you have made reasonable 

inquiry and that the information known or readily obtainable by you is insufficient to 

enable you to admit or deny the matter. 

3. A Request wil be deemed admitted unless, within ten days of service of this request, 

you serve a sworn written answer to the Request. 

4. Your answer should specifically admit or deny the Request or set forth in detail the 

reasons why you cannot truthfully admit or deny it after exercising due diligence to 

secure the information necessary to make a full and complete ansWer, including a 

description of all efforts you made to obtain the information necessary to answer the 

Request fully. 

s:=n you object to a POltÌOIl öì an aspect ötiequesl, slale the grounds för your
 

objection with specificity and respond to the remainder of 
 the Request. 

6. When good faith requires that you qualify your answer or deny only a part of the matter 

of which an admission is requested, specify so much of it as is true and qualify or deny 

the remainder. 

3 
PUBLIC
 

7. If you consider that a matter of which an admission has been requested presents a 

genuine issue for trial, you may not, on that ground alone, object to the request; instead, 

you must deny the matter or set fort reasons why you cannot admit or deny it. 

8. Answer each Request fully and completely based on the information and knowledge 

currently available to you, regardless of 
 whether you intend to supplement your
 

response upon the completion of discovery.
 

9. If in answering any Request you claim ambiguity in either the Request or any 

applicable definition or instruction, identify in your response the language you consider 

ambiguous and state the interpretation you are using in responding. 

10. Each Request is continuing in nature and requires prompt amendment of any prior 

response if you learn, after acquiring additional information or otherwise, that the 

response is in some material respect incomplete or incorrect. See 16 C.F.R. § 3.31(e). 

11. If you object to any Request or any portion of any Request on the ground that it 

requests information that is privileged (including the attorney-client privilege) or falls 

within the attorney work product doctrine, state the nature of the privilege or doctrine 

you claim and provide all other information as required by 16 C.F.R. § 3.38A. 

12. Whenever a Request is stated in the conjunctive, it shall also be taken in the 

disjunctive, and vice versa. 

13. Whenever a Request is stated in the singular, it shall also be taken in the plural, and vice 

versa. 

14. Estimated dates should be given when, but only when, exact dates cannot be supplied. 

Any estimates should be identified as such. 

4
 
PUBLIC
 

September 12, 2013 Respectfully submitted, 

sf Edward D. Hassi 

EDWAR D. HASSI 

Chief Litigation Counsel 

Federal Trade Commission 

Bureau of Competition 

600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

Telephone: (202) 326-2470 

Facsimile: (202) 326-2884 

Email: ehassi@ftc.gov 

Attorney for Complaint Counsel 

5 
PUBLIC
 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on September 12,2013, I filed the foregoing document electronically 

using the FTC's E-Filing System, which wil send notification of such fiing to: 

Donald S. Clark 

Secretary 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Rm. H-I13 

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-IIO 

Washington, DC 20580 

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

Alan Goudiss
 

Dale Collns 

Richard Schwed 

Lisl Dunlop 

Shearman & Sterling LLP 

.599 Lexington Avenue 

New York, NY 10022 

(202) 848-4906 

agoudiss@shearman.com 

wcollins@shearman.com 

rschwed@shearman.coin 

ldunlop@shearman.com 

Counsel for Respondent Ardagh Group s.A. 

Christine Varney 

i' onãtan even 

Athena Cheng 

Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP 

825 Eighth Avenue 

New York, NY 10019 

(212) 474-1140 

cvarney@cravath.com 

yeven@cravath.com 

acheng@cravath.com 

6
 
PUBLIC 

Counsel for Respondent Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc. 

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 12, 2013 By: sf Angelike Mina 

Attorney 

7