UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

 __________________________________________ 

 ) 

In the Matter of ) 

 ) 

CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY N.V. ) 

 a foreign corporation, ) Docket No. 9300 

 ) 

CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY ) 

 a corporation, ) PUBLIC 

 ) 

PITT-DES MOINES, INC., ) 

 a corporation. ) 

__________________________________________) 

RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT COUNSEL'S PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

TO CLARIFY RESPONDENTS' OBLIGATIONS AS TO THE PITT-DES MOINES 

AND CB&I CORPORATE NAMES

Respondents1

 file this Response to Complaint Counsel's Petition for Reconsideration to 

Clarify Respondents' Obligations as to the Pitt-Des Moines and CB&I Corporate Names 

("Counsel's Petition to Clarify"), subject to and without waiving Respondents' Petition to 

Reconsider the Opinion and Order in Light of Entry after the Close of the Record and 

Overbreadth and Respondents' Motion For Clarification or, in the Alternative, For a Stay, filed 

February 1, 2005. 

I. Clarification Regarding the CB&I Name. 

Respondents do not oppose Counsel's Petition to Clarify to the extent that it seeks to 

ensure that, in the event of and upon divestiture of any part of CB&I, the purchaser of the assets 

sold pursuant to a final order of the Federal Trade Commission shall not acquire any right or title 

in or to the CB&I corporate name. 

 

1

 Respondents Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V. and Chicago Bridge & Iron Company are 

referred to herein collectively as "Respondents" or "CB&I." 
2 

 Respondents do, however, oppose the inclusion of the language "except to the extent 

necessary to achieve the purpose of, and to assure compliance with, this Order" in sections I.J. 

and IV. of the Proposed Order Modifying Final Order, attached to Counsel's Petition to Clarify. 

The exception language creates an unnecessary ambiguity in the Order. 

II. Clarification Regarding the PDM Name. 

 Respondents object to those portions of Counsel's Petition to Clarify that impose an 

affirmative duty on CB&I to transfer any right or title in and to the corporate name of Pitt-Des 

Moines ("PDM"), including the PDM mark. On the acquisition of the Industrial Division of 

PDM, CB&I acquired only a one-year, non-renewable, non-exclusive transitional license to the 

use of the PDM mark. That license expired on February 6, 2002. Accordingly, CB&I has no 

right or title in or to the PDM corporate name or mark which it could transfer to a purchaser. 

Dated: February 10, 2005 

 Respectfully submitted, 

 

 Clifford H. Aronson 

 SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP 

 4 Times Square 

 New York, NY 10036-6522 

 Telephone No.: 212-735-2644 

 Facsimile No.: 917-777-2644 

 Charles W. Schwartz 

 SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP 

 1600 Smith, Suite 4400 

 Houston, TX 77002-7348 

 Telephone No.: 713-655-5160 

 Facsimile No.: 888-329-2286 

 ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENTS 

 CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY N.V. 

 AND CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY 
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Sara L. Bensley, hereby certify that on February 10, 2005, a true and correct 

copy of the foregoing was served on the following persons by hand delivery: 

Donald S. Clark Rhett R. Krulla, Esq. 

Secretary Assistant Director 

Federal Trade Commission Bureau of Competition 

Room H-159 Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20580 Room NJ-6120 

 Washington, D.C. 20001 

Steven L. Wilensky, Esq. 

Federal Trade Commission 

601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W. 

Room NJ-6120 

Washington, D.C. 20001

 

 Sara L. Bensley