ORIG~NAL 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of CASE NO. 9327 

Polypore International, Inc.
 

a corporation. PUBLIC DOCUMENT
 

THIRD PARTY ENTEK INTERNATIONAL LLC'S
 

MOTION FOR IN CAMERA TREATMENT OF DOCUMENTS
 

PREVIOUSLY DESIGNATED AS CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO 16 C.F.R § 3.45(b)
 

Pursuant to 16 C.F.R. §3.45(b), third pary ENTEK International LLC 

("ENTEK") moves for an Order directing in camera treatment of the documents previously 

designated as confidential listed and flIed under seal in Appendix A. 

In support of this unopposed motion, ENTEK refers the Cour to, and incorporates 

herein, the contemporaneously-filed memorandum, and the Declarations of 
 Dan Weerts, Hano 

F. Kaiser, and Brett D. Collns. 

Dated: April 8, 2009 Respectfully submitted, 

By .~. 

D lus Ogloza 

BdtMinD ~ 16 G
 

Hano F. Kaiser I
 

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 

San Francisco, California 94111-6538 

Telephone: + 1.415.391.0600 

Facsimile: + 1.415.395.8095 

hano.kaiser(flw.com 

darius.ogloza(flw.com 

Attorneys for ENTEK International LLe 
- -

- -

- -

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
 

In the Matter of CASE NO. 9327 

Polypore International, Inc. 

a corporation. 

PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

PROPOSED ORDER 

Upon consideration ofENTEK International LLC's Motion for In eamera 

Treatment of 
 Documents Previously Designated as Confidential Pursuant to 16 C.F.R. § 3.45(b), 

and the Cour being fully informed, it is this _ day of April, 2009, hereby 

ORDERED, that the Motion is GRANTED; and it is fuher 

ORDERED, that the following documents and information therein shall be 

accorded in camera treatment for the periods of 
 time indicated below. 

Proposed Document Number(s) Period of time in camera

Exhibit No.
 treatment granted


RXOO332 ENTEK 000001- ENTEK 000006 1 year PX0900 FTC-ENTK 001003-001009 

RXOl13 

ENTEK 000007-ENTEK 000079 5 years 

RXOO333 ENTEK 000197- ENTEK 000208 3 years RXOl14 FTC-ENTK 000056-000189 

RX00334 ENTEK 000218 -ENTEK 000271 3 years RXOl17 FTC-ENTK 000551-000562 

RX00335 ENTEK 000272- ENTEK 000277 i year 

RXOO146 ENTEK 000279- ENTEK 000285 3 years RX00336 
Proposed 

Exhibit No. 

RXOO337 

RXOO339 

RXOO340 

RXOO341 

RXOO152 

RXOO343 

RXOO342 

RXOO351 

Document Number(s) 

ENTEK 000290-ENTEK 000291 - ­

ENTEK 000413-ENTEK 000429 - ­

ENTEK 000431- ENTEK 000438 - ­

ENTEK 000439- ENTEK 000442 - ­

ENTEK 000515-ENTEK 000534 - ­

ENTEK 000849- ENTEK 000853 - ­

ENTEK 000904- ENTEK 001077 - ­

ENTEK 01302- ENTEK 01303 - ­

Period of time in camera 

treatment granted 

1 year 

3 years 

3 years 

1 year 

3 years 

3 years 

3 years 

1 year 

RXOO353 ENTEK 001492- ENTEK 001492 3 years 

RXOO356 

RXOO136 

PX 1814 

RXOO 123 

RXOO345 

ENTEK 01656- ENTEK 01704 -

ENTEK 003567- ENTEK 003567 - ­

ENTEK 003673- ENTEK 003682 - ­ . 

1 year 

i year 

3 years 

PX1813 

RX01522 

RXO 1523 

RXOO141 

RXOO148 

RXOO346 

PX1809 

PX 1815 

RXOO130 

PX1804 

ENTEK 005152 

ENTEK 005335- ENTEK 005336 - ­

ENTEK 005338- ENTEK 005342 - ­

ENTEK 006814- ENTEK 006824 - ­

ENTEK 006827- ENTEK 006840 - ­

ENTEK 006868- ENTEK 006871 - ­

ENTEK 007039- ENTEK 007040 - ­

ENTEK 007164- ENTEK 007165 - ­

3 years 

1 year 

3 years 

1 year 

1 year 

3 years 

3 years 

3 years 

PX1801 ENTEK 007173 3 years 

RXOO129 

RXOO128 

PX1818 

ENTEK_ 007234- ENTEK_ 007237 

ENTEK 007410- ENTEK 007432 - ­

ENTEK 008345- ENTEK 008348 - ­

3 years 

3 years 

3 years 

RXOO142 

RX00348 

RXOO 125 

ENTEK 008450 

ENTEK 008474- ENTEK 008481 - ­

3 years 

1 year 

2
 
- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

Proposed Period of time in camera Document Number(s)
 Exhibit No.
 treatment granted RXOO139 ENTEK 009014- ENTEK 009019 3 years
 RXOO349
 

PX 1824 

RXOO140 ENTEK 009111- ENTEK 009112 1 year 

RXOO131 ENTEK 009787-ENTEK 009801 3 years RXOO350 

RXOO124 ENTEK 011818- ENTEK 011824 1 year 

PX1803 ENTEK 012596- ENTEK 012597 3 years 

RXOO147 ENTEK 013029- ENTEK 013030 3 years RXOI513 

PX 1825 

RXOO143 ENTEK 013080- ENTEK 013083 3 years RXOO352 

RXOO138 ENTEK 014926- ENTEK 014928 3 years 

RXOO 134 ENTEK 015016- ENTEK 015017 3 years PX1811 

RXOO150 ENTEK 015059 3 years RXOO354 

PX 1816 ENTEK 015130- ENTEK 015132 3 years 

RXOO135 ENTEK 015176- ENTEK 015179 1 year 

RXOO127 ENTEK 015206- ENTEK 015210 1 year 

PX1821 ENTEK 015454- ENTEK 015456 3 years 

RXOO 132 ENTEK 015495-ENTEK 015497 3 years 

RXOO355 ENTEK 015569- ENTEK 015606 1 year 

RXOO259 ENTEK 015607- ENTEK 015644 1 year PX1832 

RXOO260 ENTEK 015645- ENTEK 015660 3 years 

RXOO261 ENTEK 015661- ENTEK 015678 1 year 

RXOO120 ENTEK 015679- ENTEK 015742 5 years RXOO121 

RXOO122 

RXOO262 

PX1800 ENTEK 015784 1 year 

RXOO118 ENTEK 016581- ENTEK 016588 3 years 

RXOO119 ENTEK 016704-ENTEK 016711 3 years 

RXOO116 ENTEK 017005- ENTEK 017010 5 years 

3 
- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

Proposed 

Exhibit No.
 

RXOO115
 

RX00126
 

PX 1817 

PX1802 

PX 1823 

PX 1820 

RX01514 

RXOO358 

RXOO112 

PX1830 

PX 1828 

PX1831 

PX 1826 

PX2109 

Period of time in camera Document Number(s) treatment granted ENTEK 017522- ENTEK 017534 1 year 

ENTEK 018606- ENTEK 018620 3 years 

ENTEK 020967- ENTEK 020968 3 years 

ENTEK 021638 1 year 

ENTEK 022545- ENTEK 022546 1 year 

ENTEK 022583- ENTEK 022586 3 years 

ENTEK 024043- ENTEK 024052 5 years 

ENTEK 024053- ENTEK 024058 1 year FTC-ENTK -000993-000998 

ENTEK 024059- ENTEK 024074 3 years 

ENTEK 024075 3 years 

ENTEK 024078- ENTEK 024079 3 years 

ENTEK 024081- ENTEK 024084 3 years 

ENTEK 024085-ENTEK 024086 1 year 

The Honorable D. Michael Chappell
 

Chief Administrative Law Judge 

4
 
) 

0: Ri f' n N dflL H.:U i '~,f1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
 

In the Matter of CASE NO. 9327 

Polypore International, Inc. 

a corporation. PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

THIRD PARTY ENTEK INTERNATIONAL LLC'S MEMORANDUM
 

IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR IN CAMERA TREATMENT OF
 

DOCUMENTS PREVIOUSLY DESIGNATED AS
 

CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO 16 C.F.R § 3.45(b)
 

ENTEK International LLC ("ENTEK") is not a party to this proceeding. During 

all phases of 
 the Federal Trade Commission's ("Commission") investigation and the subsequent 

adjudicatory proceeding, ENTEK has cooperated with the discovery demands of the Commission 

and Respondent Polypore International, Inc. ("Polypore"). While facilitating access to its 

relevant, highly confidential documents, ENTEK has consistently taken steps to protect the 

confidential nature of the documents described in this Motion, which are listed in and fied under 

seal in Appendix A. As established by the concurrently-fied Declaration of Dan Weerts 

("Weerts Decl."), disclosure ofENTEK's confidential information to the public exposes ENTEK 

to a substantial risk of serious injury and would undoubtedly negatively impact competition in 

the polyethylene battery separator industry. The confidential information at issue meets the
 

requirements for in camera treatment as provided in 16 C.F.R. § 3.45(b). Moreover, neither the 

Commission nor Polypore object to the relief 
 requested here. For these reasons, ENTEK 
respectfully requests that this Cour issue an order directing that the confdential information 

receive in camera treatment during trial and for the respective periods set forth in Appendix A. 

ARGUMENT
 

I. IN CAMERA TREATMENT IS MANDATED UNDER THE FEDERAL TRADE
 

COMMISSION'S RULES OF PRACTICE 

Under 16 C.F.R. §3.45(b), the Administrative Law Judge shall order that material 

"be placed in camera only after finding that its public disclosure wil likely result in a clearly 

defined, serious injury to the person, partnership, or corporation requesting in camera treatment." 

"The party seeking in camera treatment must make a clear showing that the information 

concerned is sufficiently secret and sufficiently material to (its) business that disclosure would 

result in serious competitive injury." In the Matter of Dura Lube Corp., 1999 FTC Lexis 255 * 6 

(1999). "The likely loss of business advantages is a good example of a 'clearly defined, serious 

injur.'" In the Matter of Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., 2000 FTC LEXIS 138 * 6 (2000). 

When determining materiality and secrecy, the following six factors are usually weighed: "(1) 

the extent to which the information is known outside of the applicant's business; (2) the extent to 

which the information is known by employees and others involved in the applicant's business; 

measures taken by the applicant to guard the secrecy of 
 the information; (4) the 

value ofthe information to the applicant and its competitors; (5) the amount of effort or money 

expended by the applicant in developing the information; and (6) the ease or difficulty with 

which the information could be properly acquired or duplicated by others." Id. 

(3) the extent of 


A. ENTEK Has Preserved the Confidentiality of the Documents At Issue 

The confidential information at issue in this Motion generally falls into the 

following six categories: (1) customer contracts; (2) confidential communications with 

customers and/or confidential customer information; (3) ENTEK's price lists, individual 

customer pricing and cost; (4) ENTEK's sales and/or capacity data; (5) ENTEK's product 

2
 
information and/or testing results; and (6) ENTEK's global business plans and strategy. 

The confidential information which is the subject of the instant motion consists 

primarily of specific ENTEK business records and sumaries of business records which are not 

known outside of ENTEK and which ENTEK has disclosed only to those of its employees who 

have a need to know the information in order to perform their job fuctions properly. (Weerts 

Decl. irir 5-10.) ENTEK has also taken significant steps to protect the confidential nature of this 

information, both in the regular course of its business and in connection with this proceeding. 

(Weerts Decl. irir3, 5-10; Declaration ofHano F. Kaiser ("Kaiser Decl.") irir 5,6.) Accordingly, 

there should be no question that the first three of the six factors considered by the Cours in 

determining whether to grant in camera treatment are met in this case. 

Specifically, ENTEK produced the confidential information only after specifically 

negotiating, at substantial expense to it, a letter-agreement with Respondent Polypore that 

modified the protective order previously entered by the paries in this case in a manner to ensure 

added layers of 
 protection to ENTEK's confidential information. (Weerts Decl. ir 3; Kaiser Decl. 

irir 5,6; see Stipulation and Order Regarding Discovery Related to ENTEK International LLC 

entered on November 18,2008.) The purpose of 
 this special agreement was to ensure that 

ENTEK's confidential materials would receive sufficient protection from disclosure to 

competitors and the public. 

In addition, and apart from this litigation, ENTEK has taken adequate 

precautionary measures to guard the secrecy of its confidential information. The confidential 

information is not distributed outside of 
 the company. (Weerts Decl. irir 5-10.) Additionally, 

ENTEK has specifically limited dissemination of such information within its business 

organization to those who need to know the information to perform their job fuctions. (Weerts
 

Decl. irir 5-10.) For example, pricing information is only distributed to ENTEK's senior 

management, and when necessary, to sales employees strictly in the context of a paricular 

customer relationship. (Weerts Decl. ir 7.) All ENTEK employees are required to sign 

nondisclosure agreements. (Weerts Decl. ir 11.) In short, ENTEK has gone to great lengths to 

preserve the confidentiality of the confidential information. 

3 
B. The Information at Issue is Valuable to ENTEK's Business and Its
 

Disclosure Would Result in Serious Competitive Injury to ENTEK and the 

Public 

The subject matter of 
 the confidential information is detailed, highly sensitive and 

extremely valuable to ENTEK's ability to successfully compete. (Weerts Decl irir 2,5-10.) For 

example, these documents include annual sumaries of sales volume and price by customers on 

a global basis, as well as, short-term and long-term business strategies. Also included are actual 

customer contracts providing such detail as price, supply demands and product specifications. 

Each and everyone of the six categories of information covered in the documents is highly 

material to the day-to-day ruing ofENTEK's business. (Weerts Decl. irir 5-10.) ENTEK has 

incured great cost becoming a leader in the polyethylene battery separator industry. (Weerts 

Decl. ir 9.) The company has dedicated significant time and money to developing superior 

product lines and a winning business strategy which streamlines production and capitalizes on its 

strengths. (Weerts Decl. irir 9, 10.) In fact, the confidential information includes some ofthe 

company's most valuable business secrets. (Weerts Decl. ir 12.) 

This confidential information, if disclosed, also would be extremely valuable to 

ENTEK's competitors, suppliers, and customers. For example, long-term contract pricing, 

product specifications and customer lists are core business secrets. (Weerts Decl. irir 5-7.) 

ENTEK spent milions of dollars to develop this information and tens of thousands of dollars to 

keep this information from Polypore. (Weerts DecL. irir 3,9.) Ifthe information were disclosed to
 

the public, ENTEK would suffer immediate har as customers would use their knowledge about 

revealed customer contract terms as bargaining leverage vis-à-vis ENTEK and competitors 

would gain an unfair advantage as they could approach ENTEK's customers ared with the 

knowledge of 
 the exact terms ofENTEK's contracts. (Weerts Decl. irir 2,5.) 

In addition to harming ENTEK, disclosure would also har competition in the 

market for battery separators in that the removal of uncertainty would diminish the incentives of 

4
 
ENTEK's competitors to bid aggressively. Similarly, ENTEK's competitiveness would be 

significantly impaired as ENTEK's suppliers would be able to use the exact downstream pricing 

information as leverage in negotiating supply contracts, which would put ENTEK at an 

unjustified disadvantage vis-à-vis its competitors. (Weerts Decl. ir 7.) Accordingly, public 

access to ENTEK's confidential and proprietary information, paricularly disclosure to 

Polypore,l would expose ENTEK to a serious competitive disadvantage and would 

unquestionably result in an egregious, and devastating, injury to ENTEK's ability to compete. 

(Weerts DecL. irir 2,5-12.) 

C. The Public Interest in Disclosure of the Information At Issue is Outweighed 

by the Likelihood of Serious Competitive Harm to ENTEK 

The public has no genuine interest in gaining access to confidential ENTEK 

\ 

business records. On balance, as shown above, ENTEK has much to lose should its confidential 

information be disseminated to the public. 

"(T)he requests of (third parties) deserve special solicitude. As a policy matter, 

extensions of confidential or in camera treatment in appropriate cases involving third pary 

bystanders encourages cooperation with future adjudicative discovery requests." In the Matter of 

Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp., 103 F.T.C. 500 *2-3 (1984). ENTEK has cooperated with 

the discovery demands in this case, while taking careful measures to protect its confidential 

information. Disclosing documents containing ENTEK's highly confidential information wil 

not materially promote resolution of 
 this matter or measurably enhance the public's 

understanding of the proceedings. Moreover, the disclosure to Polypore and the public would 

have devastating consequences for the public interest, namely competition in the battery 

separator industry because, as stated in the Commission's complaint, ENTEK is Polypore's "sole 

Counsel for the Commission has alleged in the Complaint that ENTEK is Polypore's "sole 

remaining competitor." Complaint, fied September 10,2008, at ir19. 

5 
remaining competitor."i The Commission and Polypore do not object to ENTEK's motion 

seeking in camera treatment over the confidential information identified in Appendix A. 

Brett D. Collns irir 2-4.) (Declaration of 


D. Protection Should Extend for a Period of One to Five Years
 

"Where in camera treatment is granted for ordinar business records, such as 

business plans, marketing plans, or sales documents, it is typically extended for two to five 

years." In the Matter of Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., 2000 FTC LEXIS 157 *7 (2000). The 

natue of the highly confidential information contained in Appendix A deserves in camera 

protection for a minimum of one year, and in some cases up to five years. ENTEK's product, 

sales and capacity data, along with its business strategy information, are crucial to ENTEK's 

competitive positions. (Weerts Decl. irir 2,5-10.) Because public disclosure would be 

devastating to ENTEK, maintaining the confidentiality of these materials is vital to ENTEK's 

continuing business. (Id.) ENTEK has reviewed and assessed the confidential information 

contained in each document identified in Appendix A and has indicated the minimum time 

period for which in camera treatment is necessary to avoid serious injur. (Weerts Decl. ir 12.) 

The time periods provided are based on careful analysis of the confidential information at issue. 

(Id.) Accordingly, ENTEK respectfully requests that the information identified in Appendix A 

be afforded in camera protection for the period of time indicated therein. 

Complaint, fied September 10, 2008, at ir19. 

6
 

i 
CONCLUSION 

For the forgoing reasons, ENTEK respectfully requests that the Cour enter an 

order providing for in camera treatment of the confidential informatiop. described in Appendix 

A hereto. 

Dated: April 8, 2009 Respectfully submitted, 

By J.~ ()~/ Iß.C-,
 

BdbHo ~ ~.¿.


Hanno Kaiser 

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 

San Francisco, California 94111-6538 

Telephone: + 1.415.391.0600 

Facsimile: +1.415.395.8095 

hanno.kaiser(flw.com 

darius.ogloza(flw.com 

Attorneys for ENTEK International LLe 

7
 
"'-~';'--'~~'--"'~'.~-"'---'-'-----'-'~''"--~I--'''"_,,,.,.'N'N',..'.,"',.."'_...."",._,..._'-''..''.~,'''..,'-"'"''''...,..~''..,,'.."",....,.~.,..,,¡""¡¡~..~,,=-..;:..""'=""_=.~"'''''''.h~~f..''#.....,"J,,_'''''',yy;ø....~,;r.;¡:;;4;;;(¡J,;q;i,.'~~y;,;J;fi¡:kH¡ff..~.:tO~~.:w;(a,w~*;ll.z~)j~ 

UNTED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERA TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of CASE NO. 9327 

Polypore International, Inc. 

a corporation. PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

DECLARATION OF DAN WEERTS IN SUPPORT OF ENTEK INTERNATIONAL 

LLC'S MOTION FOR IN CAMERA TREATMENT OF DOCUMNTS PREVIOUSLY 

DESIGNATED AS CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO 16 C.F.R S 3.45(b) 

I, Dan Weerts, under penalty ofpeIjur, declare that the following is true and
 

correct to the best of my knowledge: 

1. I am Vice President of Sales & Marketing at ENTEK International LLC
 

("ENTEK"). I have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein and, if called upon, I could 

and would competently testify thereto. 

2. I have reviewed Appendix A to ENTEK's motion for in camera treatment,
 

including all of 
 the documents identified on that list. In my judgment, as an offcer ofENTEK 

entrsted with overseeing sales and marketing activities on behalf of the company, all of the 

documents identified on Appendix A contain confidential business information of ENTEK that, 

in my view, would result in the likely loss of business advantages to ENTEK if the contents were 

to be disclosed to Polypore and other participants in the battery separator market. In fact, I 

firmly believe that disclosure to Polypore (and the public) of the infonnation contained in the 

documents identified on Appendix A would result in an egregious, and devastating, injury to 
........................................ .....................--................._........ .......-......._.~--....~~......~_.-...~..-..._..__.,.....~.".~.._........~l-"....."..""'.._~.".~.-"H~'.:..."'..;".~~.I.C,.,...~:-.,."';~.~.:,,.:.:..:,;~""..,';..-":'~,l.::.:,.""~~.""..¡.¡n"':"":"~.::!l,~
 

ENTEK's ability to compete. I also believe that the documents identified on Appendix A are 

material to ENTEK's business in the sense that these constitute core company infonnation and/or 

important business records. 

3. ENTEK sought legal advice and incurred substantial cost, in the range of 

several tens of thousands of dollars, to protect the confidentiality of the documents it produced in 

connection with th~ above litigation. 

4. For ease of 
 reference, we have categorized the information identified in 

Appendix A into six subject matter categories. Each category is discussed separately below. 

5. Documents in Category 1 pertain to customer contracts. The information 

contained in these documents has not, to my knowledge, been disclosed to any member ofthe 

public aside from the parties themselves. The tenns of such contracts are kept strictly 

confidential by ENTEK, and the contracts are not widely distributed within the company. 

Details are disclosed only to a select group of ENTEK employees, including senior management. 

Sales employees responsible for a particular customer relationship may be given access to certain 

portions of the relevant contract. This infonnation is material to ENTEK's business and its 

disclosure to Polypore, customers, competitors, and the public would cause serious competitive 

injury to ENTEK. ENTEK has spent substantial resources on securing and maintaining its 

contractual relationships with its customers. ifthe information were disclosed to the public, 

ENTEK would suffer immediate haim as customers would use their knowledge about revealed 

customer contract terms as bargaining leverage vis-à-vis ENTEK and competitors would gain an 

unfair advantage as they could approach ENTEK's customers armed with the knowledge of the 

exact terms of ENTEK's contracts. 

6. Documents in Category 2 contain confidential communications with 

customers and/or confidential customer information. This information relates to customer 

2
 
.............. ..... .............. ........, ......_...""._._...._.."."....._....._...._"--_._-~~-~--.-~~._~~~~~"...-._~"~..~~.~--..~....~..~~---".._.._--~-:,.-""J...~~._."'''".._:......_._~"'-~..:...,..J.....,....._:..~..,:,..,.~...."".."".'...."',.c"".,....~"'/...."i""::~.,"'".:,..:;:.:~;""r.:::l-..';
 

relationships and strategy relating to keeping and/or secuii.ng additional business from ENTEK 

customers. This infonnation is not disèlosed to the public in ENTEK's regular course of 

business. The details about customer relationships are kept stiictly confidential and are not 

widely distrbuted within the company. Details are disclosed only to a select group of ENTEK 

employees, including senior management, and when necessary the sales employees responsible 

for that particular customer relationship. This information is material to ENTEK's business and 

its disclosure to Polypore and the public would cause serious competitive injury to ENTEK. 

ENTEK has spent substantial resources on securing and maintaining its contractual relationships 

with its customers and these communications contain materal terms refining those relationships. 

7. Documents in Category 3 contain information about ENTEK's piice lists, 

individual customer pricing and cost. The details about ENTEK's product costs and prices are 

kept strictly confidential and are not widely distiibuted within the company. Details are 

disclosed only to a select group ofENTEK employees, including senior 
 management and, when 

necessary, the sales employees strictly in the context of a partcular customer relationship. This 

information is plainly mateiial to ENTEK's business and directly impacts ENTEK's competitive 

position. ifthe infonnation were disclosed to the public, competitors would gain an unfair
 

advantage as they could approach ENTEK's customers armed with the knowledge of 
 the exact 

contract tenns. Similarly, ENTEK's competitiveness would be significantly impaired as 

ENTEK's suppliers would be able to use the exact downstream pricing infonnation as leverage 

in negotiating supply contracts, which would put ENTEK at an unjustified disadvantage vis-à-vis 

its competitors. Disclosure of such infol1nation to Polypore and the public would cause seiious 

competitive injury to ENTEK. 

8. Docuinents in Category 4 contain infoimation about the ENTEK's sales
 

and/or capacity. This information is not disclosed to the public. It is highly confidential and not 

3 
~~'-~~'~"~~~~'-'~"""~"""'~'""-~~""'"__'_""''''",'~N,"~,.-:~A"""_~__"""'''""'~'~'''~"''~''_'l-.._--''':~''''~':)","-,-''~'''',~,;",......~"""......';.':""'="'''.~J.......:,.:~~,..~;;¡':,::~-:W..4'":.'':;=M.-::.;::Jr..;:%.¡...;.;::"::~;z.iS,s:W,W,s:':i;=;~(i~;:¡:i~~
 

widely distributed within the company. Capacity details are disclosed only to a select group of 

ENTEK employees, including senior management and others strctly on a need-to-know basis. 

Sales details are even more closely guarded and disclosed only to senior management. This 

infonnation is material to ENTEK's business and directly impacts ENTEK's competitive 

position. Its disclosure to Polypore and the public would cause serious competitive injury to 

ENTEK. 

9. Documents in Category 5 contain proprietary information about ENTEK
 

products and testing thereof This information is highy confidential and kept secret in the 

regular course ofENTEK's business; it is 
 certainly not disclosed to the public. Details are 

disclosed only to a select group of ENTEK employees, including senior management and 

ENTEK engineers and/or manufacturing team members responsible for product development. 

ENTEK has spent milions of dollars on research and development costs. Ths infonnation is 

material to ENTEK's business and directly impacts ENTEK's competitive position. Its 

disclosure to Polypore and the public would cause serious competitive injury to ENTEK. 

10. Documents in Category 6 contain detailed information about ENTEK's 

global business plans and strategy. This information is highy confidential and kept secret in the 

regular course ofENTEK's business; it is not disclosed to the public. Details are disclosed only 

to a select group of ENTEK employees, including senior management. This information is 

material to ENTEK's business and directly impacts ENTEK's competitive position. ENTEK has 

dedicated significant time and money to developing superior product lines and a winning 

business strategy which streamlines production and capitalizes on its strengths. Its disclosure to 

Polypore and the public would cause seiious competitive injury to ENTEK. 

11. ENTEK requires all of its employees to sign a nondisclosure agreement 

covering all of 
 the kinds of documents described in the paragraphs immediately above. Among 

4
 
......,~r.'=¡',..,,......."'....;;¡,:."'""M~i.""ai;it,..;""-..;....¡.i;6õ..~;,:;;.N__-;;":::::l;;;~""..~..~~h:,~w..:..""",;¡''-=",,,,,~,;-(,,,~,,..,,,~~~=;,,;,::.i,,;,,Il);.x,."",t...,,.';;..wmii.iò"--:...."1,Q..~"'¡;..~..~~.:~'"~:,,.w;lig;0ì~~~~~,.,I;~i3tl:;(.Ì'''¡:¡¡ii.;¡;¡j;:%i;g¡z.ø~;.:;,:¡gt¡t.;~~JW;;::'Sif:i'1
 

other things, these agreements are meant to prevent the distrbution of ENTEK' s confdential 

information. 

12. The information identified in Appendix A includes some ofENTEK's
 

most valuable business secrets. Disclosure of this confidential information would result in 

irreparable hannto ENTEK. I personally reviewed all information included in Appendix A and 

determined the level of risk of injury disclosure of such materials would have onENTEK. Based 

upon my analysis of 
 these confidential materials, I have indicated the minial period oftime for 

which, in my judgment, these documents should be provided in camera treatment. 

I declare, under the penalty of perjur under the laws ofthe United States that the 

foregoing is tre and COlTect. Signed this 8th day of April 2009, in Lebanon, Oregon. 

By 1XW~ Dan Weerts 

ENTEK International LLC 

250 N. Hansard Avenue 

Lebanon, Oregon 97355 

5 
APPENDIX A
 

IN CAMERA
 

(FILED UNDER SEAL)
 
) 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERA TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of CASE NO. 9327 

Polypore International, Inc. 

a corporation. PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

DECLARATION OF HANNO F. KAISER IN SUPPORT 
 OF ENTEK INTERNATIONAL 

LLC'S MOTION FOR IN CAMERA TREATMENT OF DOCUMENTS PREVIOUSLY 

DESIGNATED AS CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO 16 C.F.R § 3.45(b) 

I, Hano F. Kaiser, under penalty of 
 perjury, declare that the following is true and 

correct to the best of my knowledge: 

1. I am an attorney duly licensed to practice before the cours of the States of
 

N ew York and Californa. I am a partner with the law firm of Latham & Watkins LLP, legal 

counsel for ENTEK International LLC ("ENTEK"). I have personal knowledge of the matters 

stated herein and, if called upon, I could and would competently testify thereto. 

2. As counsel for third-pary ENTEK in this matter, I received notice from 

both the Federal Trade Commission ("Commission") and Polypore International, Inc. 

("Polypore") that each had identified as proposed trial exhibits certain documents that ENTEK 

produced in connection with this adjudicatory proceeding pursuant to the subpoena duces tecum 

served on it by Polypore on November 6, 2008. 

3. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of the letter from 

Steven A. Dah to Hanno Kaiser, dated March 25,2009, regarding the Commission's exhibit 
list. 

4. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of the letter from 

Eric D. Welsh to Hano Kaiser, dated March 31,2009, regarding Polypore's exhbit list. 

5. In October, November and December 2008, I engaged counsel for
 

Polypore in lengthy negotiations regarding the appropriate protections necessary to secure 

ENTEK's confidential information. These negotiations culminated in the signing of a letteragreement, dated December 22, 2008, which limited the disclosure group to the following 

individuals: (a) outside antitrust litigation counsel, i.e., Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP 

("Parker Poe") attorneys staffed on the matter; (b) outside antitrust economists (e.g., CRAI, 

CompassLexecon, LECG, Brattle Group) retained by Polypore as consultants or testifying 

experts for puroses of this litigation ("Economic Experts"); (c) Approved Industry Experts as 

defined by the Agreement; (d) Administrative Law Judge presiding over this proceeding, 

personnel assisting the Administrative Law Judge, the Federal Trade Commission 

("Commission") and its employees, and antitrust economists retained by the Commission as 

experts or consultants for this proceeding; (e) judges and other cour personnel of any court 

having jurisdiction over any appellate proceedings involving this matter; (f) cour reporters in 

this matter; (g) any ENTEK witness or deponent who may have authored or received the ENTEK 

Information; and (h) any other person(s) to whom ENTEK agrees to in writing. 

6. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is a true and accurate copy of the letteragreement between ENTEK and Polypore, dated December 22,2008. 

7. The documents listed and attached under seal in Appendix A are subject to 

the Protective Order entered on October 23,2008, and the Stipulation and Order Regarding 

Discovery Related to ENTEK International LLC entered on November 18,2008. 

2
 
I declare, under the penalty of perjury under the laws ofthe United States that the 

foregoing is true and correct. Signed this 8th day of April 
 2009, in San Francisco, California. 

of. Kaiser
 

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 

San Francisco, California 94111-6538 

Telephone: + 1.415.395.8856 

Facsimile: + 1.415.395.8095 

hanno.kaiser(flw.com 

Attorney for ENTEK International LLC 

3 
'. 

. 

, 
UNITD STATES OF AMERICA
 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

W ASHlNGTON, D.C. 20580 

Bureau of Competition 

Direct Dial
 

(202) 326-2192 

March 25, 2009
 

via Express Mail 

Hanno F. Kaiser, Esq. 

Latham & Watkins
 

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 

San Francisco, CA 94111-6538 

Re: Polypore International, Inc. 

FfC Docket No. 9327
 

Dear Mr. Kaiser: 

We are contacting you to provide you and your client formal notice, pursuant to 16 

C.F.R. § 3.45(b), that Complaint Counsel has placed documents from Entek on its exhibit list 

and intends to offer these documents into evidence in the administrative trial in this matter. The 

administrative trial is scheduled to begin on May 12,2009. All exhibits admitted into evidence 

become par of the public record unless in camera status is granted by the Administrative Law 

Judge, D. Michael Chappell. Enclosed with this letter is a list identifying the documents from 

Entek that are included on Complaint Counsel's exhibit list and a CD containing a copy of 
 those

documents. 

For documents that include sensitive or confidential information that you do not want on 

the public record, you must fie a motion addressed to Judge Chappell seeking in camera status 

or other confidentiality protections for the information pursuant to16 C.F.R. § 4.1O(g). Judge 

Chappell may order that materials, whether admitted or rejected as evidence, be placed in 

camera only after finding that their public disclosure wil 
 likely result in a clearly defined,

serious injury to the person, parnership or corporation requesting in camera treatment. 

Motions for in camera treatment for evidence to be introduced at trial must meet the 

strict standards set forth in 16 c.F.R. § 3.45 and explained in In re Dura Lube Corp., 1999 FfC 

LEXIS 255 (Dec. 23,1999); In re Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., 2000 FfC LEXIS 157 (Nov. 

22,2000) and 2000 FfC LEXIS 138 (Sept. 19,2000); In re Basic Research, Inc., 2006 FfC 

LEXIS 14 (Jan. 25, 2006). Motions also must be supported by a declaration or affidavit by a 

person qualified to explain the confidential nature of the documents. In re North Texas Specialty 

Physicians, 2004 FfC LEXIS 66 (April 23,2004). Each pary or non-pary that fies a motion 
for in camera treatment shall provide one copy of the documents for which in camera treatment 

is. sought to Judge ChapelL. Finally, examples of motions requesting in camera treatment can be 

found by searching the FTC website (i.e., www,ftc.gov). 

Please be aware that under the current Scheduling Order, the deadline for filng motions 

seeking in camera status is April 9, 2009. By that date, an original and two copies of your 

motion should be fied with the Office of the Secretary, Room H135 at 600 Pennsylvania 

Avenue, N.W., Washington D.C. 20580. Also, serve copies of your motion as follows: 

(1) send two copies by first class mail and e-mail a copy to Honorable D. Michael Chappell, 

Administrative Law Judge, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, H-106, 

Washington, DC 20580 (oaljWftc.gov); (2) Send copies by first class mail and e-mail a copy to 

counsel for Respondent Polypore International, Inc: Willam L. Rikard, Jr. and Eric D. Welsh at 

Parker, Poe, Adams & Bernstein, LLP, Three Wachovia Center, 401 South Tryon Street, Suite 

3000, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202; wiliamiikardWparkerpoe.com and 

ericwelshWparkei:oe.com; and (3) Send copies by first class mail and e-mail a copy to 

Complaint Counsel: J. Robert Robertson and Steven A, Dahm at Federal Trade Commssion, 600 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20580 (rrobertsonWftc.gov and sdahmWftc.gov). 

If you have any questions, please call me at 202-326-2192. 

Regards, 

teven A. Dahm 

Attorney 
COMPLAINT COUNSEL'S FINAL PROPOSED EXHIBIT LIST
 

EXHIBIT 

NO. 

PX0900 

PX1800 

PX1801 

PX1802 

PX1803 

PX1804 

PX1805 

PX1806 

PX1807 

PX 1808 

PX1809 

PX 1810 

PX1811 

PX1812 

PX 1813 

PX1814 

PX1815 

PX1816 

PX1817 

PX1818 

PX 1819 

PX 1820 

EXHIBIT TITLE 

Affdavit of Dan Weerts 

AMERACE, Proposed Meeting with 

Kelso (pros & cons list) 

JCI Strategic Options 

Email to Weerts from Humphrey 

w/Attach: C&D Amerace 

JCI Strategy Discussion
 

D v. E Differences 

Email to Donjon from Gerts re: 

UHMW PE new shortage - Call for 

EnerSys
 

Email to Humphrey, Weerts, et al.
 

from Fraser-Bell re: UHMWPE 

Shortage 

Email to LLC Management Team 

from Fraser-Bell re: Exide and 

EnerSys news 

Email to Fraser-Bell, et al. from 

Weerts re: EnerSys - Daramic -

Amerace 

Exide - Technologies 

Transportation 

Email to Weerts and Humphrey 

from Fraser-Bell re: Industrial leaf 

opportunity at Douglas 

US Bank Meeting - Reasons for the 

JCI Contract 

Email to Weerts from Fraser-Bell 

re: Special Industrial Separators 

Email to Ulrich, Humphrey, et al. 

from Pekala re: Entek Separators 

with low electrical resistance 

Email to Humphrey and Weerts 

from Fraser-Bell re: Oops at Moura 

Exide Meeting 

Email to Keith, Lee, et al. from 

Fraser-Bell re: Implications of L TD 

costs increases on avo prices in 

2008 

Email to Pfanner from Humphrey re: 

Entek - Sample 

Letter to GFD, et al. from DW re: 

Sales & Marketing Monthly Report
 

Email to Fraser-Bell and Weerts 

from Ulrich re: MP 

Email to Ulrich from Weerts re: BS 

separator profie
 

DATE 

7/3/2008 

1/4/2006 

5/26/2006 

1 0/9/2006 

10/17/2006 

10/3/2007 

11/3/2006 

2/28/2007 

3/27/2007 

6/28/2007 

6/29/2007 

7/4/2007 

7/26/2007 

8/15/2007 

9/26/2007 

11/26/2007 

12/21/2007 

1/18/2008 

1/25/2008 

BEG DOC 

PX0900 

ENTEK 015784 

ENTEK 007173 

ENTEK 021638 

ENTEK 012596 

ENTEK 007164 

ENTEK 006018 

ENTEK 004654 

ENTEK 004797 

ENTEK 019271 

ENTEK 006868 

ENTEK 004555 

ENTEK 015016 

ENTEK 015195 

ENTEK 005152 

ENTEK 003567 

ENTEK 007039 

ENTEK 015130 ._---- .........­

ENTEK 020967 

ENTEK 008345
 

ENTEK 006624
 

ENTEK 022583
 

ENDDOC 

PX0900-006 

ENTEK 015784 

ENTEK 007173 

ENTEK 021638 

ENTEK 012597 

ENTEK 007165 

ENTEK 006020 

ENTEK 004655 

ENTEK 004797 

ENTEK 019271 

ENTEK 006871 

ENTEK 004556 

ENTEK 015017 

ENTEK 015196 

ENTEK 005157 

ENTEK 003567 

ENTEK 007040 

ENTEK 015132 

ENTEK 020968 

ENTEK 008348 

ENTEK 006624 

ENTEK 022586 

CONFIDENTIAL - FTC DOCKET NO. 9327
 
COMPLAINT COUNSEL'S FINAL PROPOSED EXHIBIT LIST
 

EXHIBIT 

NO. EXHIBIT TITLE DATE BEG DOC ENDDOC 

Email to GFB from Keith re: Exide 

PX1821 Europe Ind. PE cherry pick 2/21/2008 ENTEK 015454 ENTEK 015456 

Email to Looper, Chapman, et al. 

from Powell re: Polypore Acquires 

PX1822 Amerace; 3/5/2008 ENTEK 012908 ENTEK 012909 

Email to Fraser-Bell from Weerts 

re: Exide - discussion with Alberto 

PX1823 Perez; 3/10/2008 ENTEK 022545 ENTEK 022546 

Letter to Fraser-Bell, et al. from OW 

re: Subject: Monthly Report - March 

PX 1824 2008; 4/10/2008 ENTEK 009014 ENTEK 009019 

Email to Gillespie, Pradeep, et al. 

from Fraser-Bell re: ENTEK 

International supply proposal to 

PX1825 Exide 6/4/2008 ENTEK 013029 ENTEK 013030 

Email to Weerts from Powell re: 

PX1826 Exide Quote 6/7/2007 ENTEK 024081 

Email to L Keith from R Keith re: 

PX1827 

PX1828 -­

Industrial Separators 

2008 Objectives Chart 

8/24/2007 

00/00/2008 

ENTEK 024080 

ENTEK 024075 

PX 1829 Sales Managers Meeting 1/14/2008 ENTEK 024076 

Entek - Customer/profile/pricing . 

PX1830 review 2/5/2008 ENTEK 024059 ENTEK 024074 

Email to Pekala, Fraser-Bell, et al. 

from Fraser-Bell re: Exide - ER 

PX1831 Presentation 3/28/2008 ENTEK 024078 

Entek - 2006 Global SLI PE 

PX1832 Separator Presentation ENTEK 015607 ENTEK 015644 

Excerpts - Responses to CIO 

Interrogatory Specifications Issued 

PX1833 to ENTEK International, LLC 4/10/2008 FTC-ENTK-00OO56 FTC-ENTK-000649 

CONFIDENTIAL - FTC DOCKET NO. 9327
 
. II
 

, I
 
PAR(ER POE
 

PARR POEADAMS & BERNSTIN UP 

Eric D. Welsh Atforneys and Counselors .t Law Three Wachovia Center 

Partner 401 South Tryon Street 

Telephone: 704.335.9052 Suite 3000 

Direct Fax: 704.335.9755 Charlotte, NC 28202-1942 

ericwelsh((parkerpoe.com Telephone 704.372.9000 

Fax 704.334.4706 

March 31, 2009 ww.parkerpoe.com 

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL AND FIRST CLASS MAIL 

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 

HANNO KAISER, ESQUIRE 

505 Montgomery Street 

San Francisco, CA 941 1 1 

hanno.kaiser~lw.com 

ENTEK INTERNATIONAL, LLC 

250 N. Hansard Ave. 

Lebanon, OR 97355 

Re: In the Matter of Polypore International, Inc. 

Docket No. 9327 

Ladies and Gentlemen: 

Following up on my letter of March 27, 2009, below please find a list identifying 

evidence Polypore International, Inc. ("Polypore") may introduce at the May 12,2009 hearng of 

the above-referenced matter. This list specifies the ENTEK documents on Polypore's trial 

exhibit list and the designation of testimony from ENTEK witness depositions. Please be 

advised that pursuant to the terms of the Protective Order and Rule 3.45(b), you may obtan in 

camera treatment for such evidence, or any portion thereof, only by appropriate motion to the 

Administrative Law Judge. If you have any questions regarding the foregoing, please feel free 

to contact me. 

Daniel Weerts - p. 1, line 1-25 

Deposition Date p. 6, line 1 - 22 

2/10/2009 p. 7, line 8 - p. 9, line 13 

p. 10, line 17 -po 11, line 18 

p. 18, line 20 - p. 20, line 15
 

p. 22, line 21 - p. 24, line 7 

p. 28, line 9 - p. 30, line 18
 

p. 33, line.6 - p. 42, line 25 

p. 43, line 13 - p. 56, line 6
 

p. 58, line 12 - p. 64, line 18
 

CHARESTON. SC
 

COLUMIA, SC
 

MYTLE BEACH, SC 

RAEIGH. NC
 

SPARTANURG. SC
 

PPAB 1549582vl 
March 31, 2009 

Page 2 

p. 67, line 13 - p. 70, line 10 

p. 73, fine 15 -po 146, line 18 

p. 149, lines 4-22 

p. 152, line I-p. 153, line 18 

p.154,line3-p.156,line 14 

p. 158, line 12 - p. 170, line 10 

p. 174, line 1 - p. 178, line 5 

p. 179, line 2 - p. 185, line 9 

p.186,line24-p.189,lineI9 

p. 190, line 1 - p. 197, line 3 

p. 214, line 2 -po 218, line 21 

. 228, line 11 - . 232, line 5 

Trial Ex. Description Date Begin Doc. No. End Doc. No. 

No. 

RX00332 Affdavit of Dan 07/03/08 ENTEK 000001 ENTEK 000006 

WeeIts 

RX00333 Responses to Int. 04/1 0/08 ENTEK 000197 ENTEK 000208 

Specs. For CID 

RX00334 Entek Sales Data 00/00/06 ENTEK 000218 ENTEK 000271 

RX00335 Capacity Utilization 00/00/06 ENTEK 000272 ENTEK 000277 

for L TD Plant 

RXOO146 Attachment 3(g) 03/07/08 ENTEK 000279 ENTEK 000290 

RX00336 Ëntek Quotations; 03/07/08 ENTEK 000279 ENTEK 000290 

Cost Data 

RX00337 Entek Call Report 12/27/07 ENTEK 000290 ENTEK 000291 

RX00338 Global Poly 00/00/00 ENTEK 000292 ENTEK 000412 

Separator RFQ Tech 

Requirements 

RX00339 Entek IntI. Response 00/00/00 ENTEK _000413 ENTEK 000429 

to RFP for Battery 

Separator Material 

RX00340 Entek Spreadsheets 01/01/06 ENTEK 000431 ENTEK_000438 

re to Plants 

RX00341 CrD Submission 01/01/06 ENTEK 000439 ENTEK 000442 

RXOO 152 Agreement between 04/01/06 Entek 000849 Entek 000853 

Entek and Tai 

K wong-Yokohama 

RX00343 Agreement Between 04/01/06 ENTEK 000849 ENTEK 000853 

Entek and Yokohama 

RX00342 Entek Call Reports 03/09/06 ENTEK 000904 ENTEK 001077 

and Visit Reports . 

RXOOI51. Agency Agreement 07/00/99 Entek 001095 Entek 001103 

PPAB 1549582vl 
March 31, 2009 

Page 3
 

with Dumas 

RX00344 Agency Agreement 

between Entek and 

Dumas 

RX01512 Chinese PE Capacity 

/ Usage Sumary 

RX00353	 Price Quote 

Summary and 

Authorization 

RXOO136	 Email from Bell re: 

Oops at Moura 

RXOO123	 2006 Strategic Sales 

& Marketing 

Objectives 

RX00345	 2006 Sales and 

Marketing Objectives 

RX01522 Email re: JCI Brazl 

& Fulguris Trip 

Report 

RX01523 Email re: Inventory 

1Q06 

RXOOl41 Exide Cherr Pick 

proposal 

RXOO148 Comparative Tests 

Between Entek and 

DaramicSeparators 

RX00346	 Comparative Tests 

Between Entek and 

Daramic Separators 

RXOO130 D vs. E major 

differences 

RXOO129 JCI Volume Potential 

Scenario and 

Capacity Plan 

RXOO128	 JCI Global SLI PE 

separator review 

2007 - 2010 

RXOO137	 Daramic High 

Performace Product 

Specification 

RX00347 Daramic Performance 

Spreadsheets 

RXOO142 2007 Objections by 

Marcus Ulrich 

07/00/99 

01/11/06 

07/26/07 

00/00/06 

00/00/06 

01/18/06 

03/24/06 

04/20/06 

00/00/00 

00/00/00 

00/00/00 

00/00/05 

00/00/07 

10/07/03 

10/07/03 

00/00/07 

ENTEK 001095 ENTEK 001103 

ENTEK 001267 ENTEK 001268 

ENTEK 001492 ENTEK 001492 

ENTEK_003567 ENTEK 003567 

ENTEK 003673 ENTEK 003682 

ENTEK 003673 ENTEK 003682 

ENTEK 005335 ENTEK 005336 

ENTEK 005338 Enetk 005342 

ENTEK 006814 ENTEK _ 006824 

Entek 006827 Entek 006840 

ENTEK_ 006827 ENTEK 006840 

ENTEK 007164 ENTEK_007165 

ENTEK 007234 ENTEK 007237 

ENTEK_007410 ENTEK_07432 

Entek 007459 Entek 007468 

ENTEK_007459 ENTEK_007468 

ENTEK 008450 ENTEK_008450 

PPAB 1549582vl 
March 31, 2009 

Page 4
 

RX00348	 Marcus Ulrich 

Spreadsheet re 2007 

Performance 

RXOO125	 Capacity - LLC 

RXOO139	 Monthly ReportMarch 2008
 

RX00349	 March 2008 Report 

RXOO140	 Email from Bell re: 

Entek Weely Core 

Team Meeting 

RX00350	 Memo of 

Understanding bw 

lCI and Entek 

RXOO124	 Strategic Review of 

Entek Global PE 

Business 

RX00351	 Stragetic Meeting 

Agenda 

RXOO147	 Email Bell to 

Gilespie re Entek 

International Supply 

Proposal to Exide 

RX01513	 Email re: ENTEK 

International Supply 

Proposal to Exide 

RXOO143	 Meeting Minutes 

Exide- Technologies 

Transportation 

RX00352 Exide Meeting 

Minutes (Feb. 2007) 

RXOO138 Email from Weerts 

re: Requirements 

RXOO134 US Ban Meeting 

Reasonf or the LCI 

Contract 

RXOO150	 Email Pekala to 

Weller re: Gold Car 

Separators 

RXOO354	 Email from Rick 

Pekala 

RXOO135	 Visit Report 

RXOO127	 SLI Capacity review 

2007 - 2009 

RXOO132	 Memo from 

Humphrey re: lCI 

00/00/07 

00/00/00 

04/1 0/08 

04/10/08 

04/13/08 

04/30/07 

00/00/00 

09/18/07 

06/04/08 

06/04/07 

02/28/07 

02/00/07 

02/13/08 

06/28/07 

03/11/08 

03/11/08 

07/18/07 

06/00/07 

05/1 0/07 

ENTEK 008450 ENTEK 008450 

ENTEK 008474 ENTEK 008481 

Entek 009014 ENTEK 009019 

ENTEK 009014 ENTEK 009019 

ENTEK 009111 ENTEK_ 005179 

ENTEK 009787 ENTEK 009181 

Entek 011818 Entek 011824 

ENTEK 01302 ENTEK 01303 

Entek 013029 Entek 013030 

ENTEK 013029 ENTEK 013030 

Entek_013080 Entek 013083 

ENTEK 013080 ENTEK_ 013083 

Entek 014926 Entek 014928 

Entek 015016 Entek 015017 

Entek 015059 Entek 015059 

ENTEK 015059 ENTEK 015059 

Entek 015176 Entek 015179 

Entek 015206 Entek_015210 

Entek 015495 Entek 015497 

PPAB 1549582vl 
March 31, 2009 

Page 5
 

Technical Visit 

RX00355	 2005 Global SLIPE 

Separator Strategic 

Review 

RX00259	 2006 Global SLI PE 

Separator strategic 

Sales and Marketing 

review 

RX00260	 2007 sales and 

marketing review 

RX0026 1 Sales Data by 

Customer and 

Countr 

RXOO120	 NewCastle Upon 

Tyne 2008 Year to 

Date Sales 

(November) 

RX00122 NewCastle Upon 

Tyne 2008 Year to 

Date Sales 

(November) 

RX00262 Entek International 

2008 YTD Sales 

RX00121	 NewCastle Upon 

Tyne Total Sales 

(March 2008) 

RX00356	 Rhino Hide 

Presentation 

RX00118	 NewCastle Upon 

Tyne 2006 Full 

YeaROOSales 

RXOO119	 NewCastle Upon 

Tyne 2007 Year to 

Dates Sales
 

(December) 

RXOO116 Customer Location 

Contracts 

RXOO115 Competitive Threats 

RXOO 126 Presentation 

RX00149	 Email Weerts to 

Humphrey Re; 

Daramic HD 

RX00357	 Aricle re Daramic 

HD Separators 

00/00/05 

00/00/06 

01/14/08 

00/00/00 

11/00/08 

11/00/08 

00/00/08 

03/00/08 

00/00/00 

00/00/06 

00/00/07 

00/00/03 

00/00/03 

00/00/00 

08/30/07 

00/00/00 

ENTEK 015569 

Entek 015607
 

Entek 015645
 

Entek 015661
 

Entek 015679
 

Entek 015679
 

Entek_015679 

Entek_015731 

ENTEK 01656 

Entek 016581
 

Entek 016704
 

Entek 017005
 

ENTEK 017522 

Entek 018606
 

Entek 022786
 

ENTEK 022787 

ENTEK 015606 

Entek 015644
 

Entek_015660 

Entek 015678
 

Entek 015682
 

Entek 015742
 

. 

Entek 015742
 

Entek 015742
 

ENTEK 01704 

Entek 016588
 

Entek 016711
 

Entek 17010
 

ENTEK 017534 

Entek 18620
 

Entek_022790 

ENTEK 022790 

PPAB lS49582vl 
March 31, 2009 

Page 6
 

RX01514 Enetk Net Sales 

March 2008 

RX00358 Affidavit of Dan 

Weerts _________n_'_. 

RX01015 Email from Keith re: 

Industrial Separators 

RXOO131 Memorandum of 

Understanding 

RX00111 Subpoena Ad 

Testificandum to 

ENTEK 

Trial Ex. Description 

No. 

RXOO114 Response to 

Interrogatory 

Specifications 

RXOO 117 EhtekSales - 2006 

RXOO 112 Affidavit of Dan 

Weerts 

RX00113 Affidavit of Dan 

Weerts 

EDW/brw 

03/00/2008 ENTEK 024043 

06/24/08 ENTEK 024053 

08/24/07 Entek 024080 

04/30/07 ENTEK-009787 

12/1 0/08 

Date Begin Doc. No. 

05/15/08 FTC-ENTK-000056 

00/00/06 FTC-ENTK-000551 

06/24/08 FTC-ENTK-000993 

07/03/08 FTC-ENTK-OO 1003 

Sincerely yours,
 

£ ~ W.ß ¡IIIlU 

Eric D. Welsh 

ENTEK 024052 , 

ENTEK 024058 

Entek 024080
 

ENTEK-01 01 81 

End Doc No.
 

FTC-ENTK-000189 

FTC-ENTK-000562 ! 

FTC-ENTK-000998
 

FTC-ENTK-OO 1 009
 

PPAB 1549582vl 
.. .' I I
 
Darius C. OgloZl	 505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 

Direct Dial: 415.395.8149	 San Francl8èo, Callfomla 94111.8538 

derlus.oglozaimlw.com	 Tel: +1.415.391.0600 Fax: +1.415.396.8096 

ww.lw.com 

FtRM I AFFILIATE OFFICES LA T HAM & W A T KIN S LLP Abu Dhabi Munich 

BarcelOna New Jersey 

Brussels New YorK 

Chicago Northem Virginia 

Doha. Orange County 

December 22, 2008	 Dubai Parls 

Frankfurt Rome 

Hamburg San Diego VIA EMAIL 

Hong Kong San Francisco 

London Shanghai 

Los Angeles. Silcon Valley 

Eric D. Welsh	 Madrid Singapore 

Milan Tokyo Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP Moscow Washington, D.C. Thee Wachovia Center, Suite 3000 

401 South Tryon Street	 File No. 030380-0007 

Charlotte, NC 28202 

Re: In the Matter of Polyp ore InternationaL Inc.. Case No. 9327 

Dear Eric: 

This letter, if countersigned by you, modifies the subpoena duces tecum served on 

ENTEK Interntional LLC ("ENTEK") by Polypote International, Inc. ("Polypore").on 

November 6, 2008 ("Subpoena") atd constitutes an agreement ("Agreemenf') 
 between Polypore 

and ENTEK Gointly, the "paries"), resolving aU discovery issues and disputes raised in 

connection with the Subpoena. The Agreement affords additional protection to documents and 

other information to be produced by ENTEK in response to the Subpoena ("ENTEK 

Information"), and at the saie time ensures that a group of outside counsel and advisors to
 

Polypore, defined below, wil obtain access to ENTEK Information that Polypore requires for its 

defense in a timely maner. The Agreement shall not limit Polypore's right to interview or seek 

relevant deposition testimony from ENTEK personnel, or additional ENTEK Information if 

Polypore believes that the ENTEK Information produced fails to respond to the level of inquiry 

described in this letter. Correspondingly, ENTEK reserves it right to object to such requests. 

I. General Aereements 

(1) Date cutoff: The default date cut off for the Subpoena is Januar 1,2003. 

(2) DiscloSure Group and MichaelL. Shor: Disclosure ofENTEK Information is limited 

to the following iiidividuals: (a)óutside arititiustliígätion couisel, Le., Parker Poe Adams & 

Bernsteiri LLP ("Parker Poe") attotn~ys staffed on the matter; (b) outside attitrst economists
 

(e.g., eRAI, CompassLexecon, LECG, Bratte Gtoup) retained by Polypore as consultats or 

testifying expert for purposes of this litigation 
 ("Economic Experts"); (c) Approved Industry 

Experts as defined in paragraph (5) below; (d) Administrative Law Judge presiding over this 

proceeding, personnel assisting the Administrative Law Judge, the Çortission and its
 

employees, åid antitrusteconomists retained by the Cortission as 
 experts ot consultants for 

this proceeding; (e) judges and other. court personiel of any cour having jurisdiction oVer any
 
Erfç D. Welsh 

Deçember 22, 2008 

Page 2
 

LATHAM&WATKI NSLLP 

appellate proceedings involving this mattr; (f) court reporters in this matter; (g) any ENTEK 

witness or deponent who may have authored or received the ENTEK Information; and (h) any 

other person(s) to whom ENTEK agrees to in writing. 
 Each individual member of the Disclosure 

Group identified in (2)(a)(b)(c) and (h) shall sign and retu a copy of 
 ths letter to Brett Collns, 

Esq., LATHAM & WATKINS LLP, 505 Montgomery Street, San Francisco, CA 94 i 1 i 

(brett.collns~iw.cOJI) prior to accessing any ENTEK Information. For purposes of clarfication, 

Michael L. Shor isnot a member of 
 the Disclosure Group, and no ENTEK Information may be 

shared, disclosed; or made available in any Way, directly or indirectly, to him. 

(3) Access to ENTEK lnforilUition: In order to prevent disclosure ofENTEK Infotmation to Polypore beyond the 
 Disclosure Group, as defined in (2) above, all ENTEK Infonnatiòn shall 

only be maintaned in.and accessed from the offces of Parker Poe, those of the Economic Experts and/or those of 
 the Approved Industry Experts (togethet,the "Restrcted Locations"). In 

the event that ENTEK Information is imported into a document review system, such ENTEK 

Infomiation shall be accessed only from tenninals located ina Restricted Location. Access to 

any document review system shall be password protected. The distribution of passwords shall be 

limited to members of the Disclosure Group. 
 No ENTEK Information maybe removed from the 

Restricted Locations except as necessary to transfer ENTEK Information from one Restricted 

Location to another (e.g., from Parker Poe to the Economic Experts). ENTEK Information that 

wil be used as exhibits at depositions, hearings or trial may be removed from the Restrcted 

Locations for that purose only and, after use, must be retured to a Restricted Location. For 

puroses of clarification, Polypore may provide the Comiission with a copy of ENTEK 

Information produced in response to the. 
 Subpoena as required by the Scheduling Order, dated 

October 22, 2008. 

Retur ofENTEK Information: Upon the completion of the present proceedings and 

any related appeal, the Disclosure Group shall retu allENTEK Infotmåtion obtained in this (4) 

action to ENTEK and no copies 
 may be maintained. 

(5) Industr experts: Should Polyporeretan industr expert - as opposed to Economic
 

Expert - in connection with this proceeding and wish todisc1ose ENTEK information to such 

experts, Polypore shall notifyENTEKofits intent and identify the industr expert(s) to whom it 

wishes to disclose such infotmation along with suffcient infonnation about the proposed. 

expert(s) to pennit ENTEK to ascertain whether the proposed 
 expert is acceptable (including, but 

not limited to, a curiculum vitae). Moreover, and to the 
 Saie end, PolyPore shall at ENTEK's 

request make any proposed industr expert(s) available for one telephone intervieW not to exceed 

one (1) hour. Any industr expert shall not have been 
 employed by Polypore and shall not be 

employed by Polypore or provide consulting services to Polypore (outside of the present matter) for a period of two (2) years after the final resolution of 
 this proceeding. For purposes of 

clarification, the industr expert must under no circumstaces disclose ENTEK Information to 

anyone outside of the Disclosure Group. ENTEK shall have the opportnity to fie a motion for 

protective order with the 
 Adninistrati've Law Judge, seeking to stop disclosure ofENTEK 

Infornation to the noticed industr expert(s) within (l0) business days of 
 receipt of the Iiotice. In the event that ENTEK doèsl1ot seek a protective 
 order, the noticed expert(s) shall be considered approved afer expiration of the ten (10) business day period or 
 written approval notice from 

ENTEK, whichever is earlier ("Approved Industr Expert"). 
Eric D. Welsh 

December 22, 2008 

i:aiie3 

LATHAM&WATKINSLL 

(6) No waiver of privileg~: For purposes of clarification, the pares do not interpret this 

Agreement as requiring ENTEK to waive its right to withhold from production any information 

protected from discovery by the attorney-client privilege, the work product doctrine, the common 

interest doctrne or any other applicable discovery privilege or exemption. 

(7) Remedies; The paries acknowledge and agree that breach of the General Agreements may cause irreparable injur to ENTEK for which monetar damages are not a suffcient 

remedy. Accordingly, ENTEK may seek injunctive relief and any other available equitable 

remedies to enforce these provisions without posting a bond if otherwise required by law. For 

puroses of clarification, this provision in no way limits ENTEK's rights to seek moneta, 

including puntive damages for breach of this agreement and/or improper disclosure of ENTEK 

Information from Polypore~ Parker Poe, the.Economic Experts, and other natual persons or
 

entities as the case may be. MoTéover, ths Agreement shallm noway limit ENTEK's rights 

under the Protective Order dated October 23, 2008. 

. II. Aeretments With Respect to Snecific Reauests 

Request Nos. i and 2: ENTEK shall produce a written resportse listing all products in 

development by ENTEK or any Third Par to compete with Polypore lead acid battery 

separators. 

Request No. :3 and 4: ENTEK shaiI produce a written response listing manufactuing or 

production facilties for lead acid battery separators in whichENTEK maintaJns any direct or 

indirect ownership interest. The wrtten respoiise shall include the following information: (a) the 

capital expenditure for the constrction and start-up or expanion of such facilty, (b) the date on 

which plans for such facilty or expansion of such facilty were approved, (c) the date on which 

constrction began on such facilty, (d) the date. ofcommisstoning or starp of such facilty, (e) 

the production capacity of such facilty; (f) the type ôr product(s) produced at such facilty, (g) 

the anticipated end use(s) of 
 the products manufactured at such facilty, (h) the technology used 

at such facilty to manufacture lead acid battery separators and (i) the cost of the lead acid battery 

separators manufactued and sold i:I such facilty, inclùdingwithout limitatiOn the cost of 

manufactungand sellng such products, including shipping 


. .
 

costs. . '


Request No.5: ENTEK shall produce copies of 
 responsive documents from the fies of
 

Dan Weert, Vice President of Sales 8? Marketing, Graeme Fraser-BeIl, Vice President 

International Sales, and Greg Humphrey, Nort & South America Account Manager, ort the basis 

of a list of specific search terms to be agreed upon by the parties~ 

RequestNo~ 6: ENTEK shall produce copies of 
 the supply agreements and proposals for 

supply agreements, excluding drafts, between ENTEK and (a) JCI,(b) Exide, (c) EnerSys, (d) 

East Penn, (e) Crown, (t) Trojan, (g) US Battery, (h) C&D,or (i) any other entity manufacturing 

lead acid batteries for sale in North America, for the sale by ENTEK to such entity oflead acid 

battery separators.
 
Eric D. Welsh
 

December 22, 2008
 

Page 4
 

LATHAMa.WATKI N SLLP 

Request Nos. 7-8, 10~13: ENTEK shall produce documents suffcient to show the
 

information sought by these requests.
 

Request Nos. 14-16: ENTEK shall produce a wrtten response reflecting the information
 

sought.
 

Request Nos. 9. 17.25. 29: .ENTEK shall produce documents sufficient to show the
 

information sought by these requests.
 

Request Nos. 18-23.27: ENTEK shall produce written responses reflecting information
 

sought by these requests.
 

Request No. 24: Polypore has withdrawn this request. ¡" 

Request Nos. 26.35: ENTEK shall produce documents suffcient to show the information
 

sought by these requests.
 

Request No. 28: ENTEK shall produce documents sufficient to show customer testing or
 

qualification of any lead acid battery separator produced by ENTEK.
 

Request Nos. 30.33.34 and 36-38: ENTEK shall produce documents in response to these
 

requests.
 

Request Nos. 31 and 32: ENTEK shall produce documents suffcient to show the
 

information sought by these requests.
 

ReQuestNos. 39 and 40: ENTEK shall 
 produce documents in response to these requests. 

ENTEK wil seek reimbursement for costs incurred in connection with the search for and
 

production of the materials requested by Polypore.
 

Best regards, 

Darus Ogloza
 

of LATHAM & WATKINS 

Counsel for ENTEK Internat al LLC 

ci"i. W~ 

Eric D. Welsh 

of PARKR POE ADAMS & BERNSTEIN LLP 

Counsel for Polypore International, Inc. 

cc: Harl0 F. Kaiser
 
Eric D. Welsh 

December 22. 2008 

Page 5 

LATHAM&WATKINSLLP 

Disclosure Group Si~natures 

Name 

Affliation 

Date 

Name 

Affiliation 

Date 

Name 

Affliation 

Date ­

Name 

Affliation 

Date 

N aie
 

Affliation 

Date 

Nane 

Affliation 

Date 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
 

In the Matter of CASE NO. 9327 

Polypore International, Inc. 

a corporation. PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

DECLARATION OF BRETT D. COLLINS IN SUPPORT 

OF ENTEK INTERNATIONAL LLC'S MOTION FOR IN CAMERA 

TREATMENT OF DOCUMENTS PREVIOUSLY DESIGNATED
 

AS CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO 16 C.F.R § 3.45(b)
 

perjury, declare that the following is true and 

correct to the best of my knowledge: 

I, Brett D. Collns, under penalty of 


1. I am an attorney duly licensed to practice before the courts of the States of 

California and Ilinois. I am an associate with the law firm of Latham & Watkins LLP, legal 

counsel for ENTEK International LLC ("ENTEK"). I have personal knowledge of the matters 

stated herein and, if called upon, I could and would competently testify thereto. 

2. On April 8,2009, I spoke with Eric Welsh of Parker Poe Adams & 

Bernstein LLP, legal counsel for Respondent Polypore International, Inc. ("Polypore"). I 

informed him that ENTEK intended to fie a motion seeking in camera treatment over several 

documents that the Federal Trade Commission and Polypore had designated as proposed trial 

exhibits. He said that Polypore would not object to ENTEK's motion for in camera treatment. 

3. On April 8, 2009, I spoke with Steven Dah of the Federal Trade 
'\ 

Commission ("Commission"). I informed him that ENTEK intended to file a motion seeking in 

camera treatment over several documents that the Federal Trade Commission and Polypore had 

designated as proposed trial exhibits. Mr. Dah confirmed via email that the Commission 

would not oppose ENTEK's motion for in camera treatment. 

4. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and accurate copy of the email sent 

from Steven A. Dahm to Brett Collns, dated April 8, 2009 at 12:47 PM, regarding In re Matter 

of Polyp ore International, Inc. - ENTEK's list of documents for in camera treatment. 

I declare, under the penalty of 
 perjury under the laws ofthe United States that the 

foregoing is true and correct. Signed this 8th day of April 
 2009, in San Francisco, California. 

BY~Åil7 6A -­ . ~llins 

LA TRAM & WATKINS LLP 

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 

San Francisco, California 94111-6538 

Telephone: + 1.415.395.8856 

Facsimile: + 1.415.395.8095 

hano.kaiser(flw.com 

Attorney for ENTEK International LLC 

2
 
.. ' . . 

Ii; I .
 
In re Matter of Polypore International, Inc. - ENTEK's list of documents for in camera tre... Page 1 of 2 

Collns, Brett (SF)
 

From: Dahm, Steven A. (sdahm(§ftc.gov) 

Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 200912:47 PM
 

To: Collins, Brett (SF) 

Cc: Kaiser, Hanno (SF)
 

Subject: RE: In re Matter of Polypore International, Inc. - ENTEK's list of documents for in camera treatment 

Brett, 

Based on our review of the list of documents that you provided for which you propose to seek in camera review, 

we will not oppose your motion for in camera treatment. 

Thanks, 

Steven A. Dahm 

Attorney, Mergers II (1032), Bureau of Competition 

Federal Trade Commission 

Room 6147 

601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20001
 

(202) 326-2192 

From: Brett.Collins(§lw.com (mailto: Brett.Collins(§lw.com)
 

Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 20092:06 PM
 

To: Dahm, Steven A. 

Cc: Hanno.Kaiser(Qlw.com
 

Subject: In re Matter of Polypore International, Inc. - ENTEK's list of documents for in camera treatment 

Steve, 

Thank you for your call. As we discussed over the phone, ENTEK will be seeking in camera treatment of 

the documents listed in the attached document. Please let us know whether the FTC intends to oppose 

ENTEK's motion. Thank you. 

Best regards,
 

Brett
 

Brett D. Collns 

LA THAM & WATKINS LLP
 

505 Montgomery Street 

Suite 2000 

San Francisco, CA 94111-6538
 

Direct Dial: +1.415.395.8233
 

Fax: +1.415.395.8095 

Email: brett.collns(§lw.com 

http://ww.lw.com 

-:-:Scan001.PDF:;:; 

4/8/2009
 
In re Matter of Polyp ore International, Inc. - ENTEK's list of documents for in camera tre... Page 2 of2 

* * * * * * * * *** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * 

To comply with IRS regulations, we advise you that any discussion of Federal t


e-mail was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used by you, (i) 

imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) to promote, market or recommen
 

transaction or matter addressed herein.
 

For more information please go to http://www.lw.com/docs/irs.pdf
 

* **** * * * ** * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * **** * * ****** **** * **** * * ** * * * * *** * * ** * * * * * * ** * * ** * * * ** 

This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or attorn 

the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution
 

without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intende
 

contact the sender and delete all copies.
 

Latham & Watkins LLP
 

4/8/2009
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
 

In the Matter of CASE NO. 9327 

Polypore International, Inc. 

a corporation. PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I am employed in the County of San Francisco, State of California. I am over the 

age of 18 years and not a par to ths action. My business address is Latham & Watkins LLP, 

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000, San Francisco, CA 94111-6538. 

On April 
 8, 2009, I served the following documents described as: 

· THIRD PARTY ENTEK INTERNATIONAL LLC'S MEMORADUM IN 

SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR IN CAMERA TREATMENT OF 

DOCUMENTS PREVIOUSLY DESIGNATED AS CONFIDENTIAL 

PURSUANT TO 16 C.F.R § 3.45(b) 

· DECLARATION OF DAN WEERTS IN SUPPORT OF ENTEK
 

INTERNATIONAL LLC'S MOTION FOR 
 IN CAMERA TREATMENT OF
 

DOCUMENTS PREVIOUSL Y DESIGNATED AS CONFIDENTIAL 

PURSUANT TO 16 C.F.R. § 3.45(b) (PUBLIC VERSION) 

· DECLARATION OF DAN WEERTS IN SUPPORT OF ENTEK
 

INTERNATIONAL LLC'S MOTION FOR 
 IN CAMERA TREATMENT OF 

DOCUMENTS PREVIOUSLY DESlGNA TED AS CONFIDENTIAL 

PURSUANT TO 16 C.F.R. § 3.45(b) (IN CAMERA VERSIONELECTRONIC COPY NOT DELIVERED VL EMAILj
 

· THIRD PARTY ENTEK INTERNATIONAL LLC'S MOTION FOR 
 IN 

CAMERA TREATMENT OF DOCUMENTS PREVIOUSLY 

DESIGNATED AS CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO 16 C.F.R. § 3.45(b) 

· DECLARTION OF HANO F. KAISER IN SUPPORT OF ENTEK 

INTERNATIONAL LLC'S MOTION FOR 
 IN CAMERA TREATMENT OF 

DOCUMENTS PREVIOUSLY DESIGNATED AS CONFIDENTIAL 

PURSUANT TO 15 C.F.R. § 3.45(b) 

· DECLARTION OF BRETT D. COLLINS IN SUPPORT OF ENTEK 

INTERNATIONAL LLC'S MOTION FOR 
 IN CAMERA TREATMENT OF 

DOCUMENTS PREVIOUSLY DESIGNATED AS CONFIDENTIAL 

PURSUANT TO 16 C.F.R. § 3.45(b) 

· PROPOSED ORDER
 

by serving a true copy of the above-described documents in the following maner: 

BY ELECTRONIC MA 

The above-described document was transmitted via electronic mail to the following part 

on Januar 9, 2009: 

Donald S. Clark, Secretar The Honorable D. Michael Chappell Offce of the Secretar Administrative Law Judge Federal Trade Commission Federal Trade Commission 

secretary~ftc.gov oalj~ftc.gov 

Robert Robertson, Esq.
 J. Steven Dahm, Esq. Federal Trade Commission Federal Trade Commission 

rrobertson~ftc.gov sdahm~ftc.gov 

2 
Wiliam L. Rikard, Jr. Eric D. Welsh 

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP 

williamrikard~parkerpoe.com ericwelsh~parkerpe.com 

The part on whom this electronic mail has been served has agreed in writing to such
 

form of service pursuant to agreement.
 

BY OVERNGHT MA DELIVRY 

I am familiar with the offce practice of 
 Latham & Watkins LLP for collecting and processing documents for overnight mail delivery by Express Mail or other express service carrer. Under 

that practice, documents are deposited with the Latham & Watkins LLP personnel responsible for 

depositing documents in a post offce, mailbox, subpost office, substation, mail chute, or other like 

facility regularly maintained for receipt of overnight mail by Express Mail or other express service 

carrier; such documents are delivered for overnight mail delivery by Express Mail or other express 

service carer on that same day in the ordinar course of 
 business, with delivery feesthereon fully prepaid and/or provided for. I deposited in Latham & Watkins LLP' interoffce 
 mail a sealed envelope or package containing the above-described document and addressed as set forth below in accordance with 

the office practice of 
 Latham & Watkins LLP for collecting and processing documents for overnight mail 

delivery by Express Mail or other express service carer:
 

Donald S. Clark, Secreta The Honorable D. Michael Chappell Office of the Secretar Administrative Law Judge Federal Trade Commission Federal Trade Commission 600 Pennsylvania 
 Avenue, NW, Rm. H-135 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20580 Washington, DC 20580 

(Original + 2 copies)
 (2 copy) 

Robert Robertson, Esq. J. Steven Dah, Esq. Federal Trade Commission Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvana Avenue, NW 600 Pennsylvana Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20580 Washington, DC 20580 

(1 copy) (1 copy) 

Wiliam L. Rikard, Jr. Eric D. Welsh Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP . Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP Three Wachovia Center Three Wachovia Center 401 South Tyson St., Suite 3000 401 South Tyson St., Suite 3000 Charlotte, NC 28202 Charlotte, NC 28202 

(1 copy) (1 copy) 

I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of 
 the Bar of, or permitted to practice before, this Cour at whose direction the service was made and declare under penalty 

of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. 

Executed on AprilS, 2009, at San ~a. . Q (
 

,1\ ~ l- Ctti&t)
 

, Beth A. Davis
 

3