ORIGINAL
 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) Docket No. 9327 

) 

) 

Polypore International, Inc. 

a corporation 

) 

) 

) PUBLIC. 

) 

RESPONDENT'S FOURTH MOTION FOR IN CAMERA TREATMENT 

OF CERTAIN TRIAL EXHIBITS 

In the instant motion, Polypore International, Inc. ("Polypore") seeks in camera treatment 

for three (3) exhibits which were inadvertently not included in Respondent's prior motions 

seeking in camera treatment of certain trial exhibits. 

The three exhibits identified in the instant motion are highly sensitive and proprietary in 

nature. Public disclosure of such information would divulge Polypore's most sensitive and
 

confidential information to competitors and/or customers, and would cause irreparable har and 

serious injur to Polypore. Accordingly, Polyporerespectfully requests an order granting in
 

camera status to these three exhibits. 

The three exhibits at issue in this motion fall within the Commission's strict standards for 

in camera treatment as set forth in Judge Chappell's April 27, 2009 Order and the opinions of 

this Commission.2 Each exhibit contains sensitive information that is "sufficiently secret and 

sufficiently material to (Polypore's) business that disclosure would result in serious competitive 

injur" and, even when balanced against the "importance of the information in explaining the 

i This motion refers to and contains information subject to Respondent's Fourth Motion for In Camera Treatment of 

Certain Trial Exhibits pursuant to Rule 3.45(b) of the FTC's Rules of Practice. Such information has been redacted and labeled 

"(Redacted - Subject to Pending Motion for In Camera Treatment)" in the public version of this motion. 

2 See In re Dura Lube Corp., 1999 FTC LEXIS 255 (Dec. 23 1999); In re Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., 2000 FTC 

LEXIS 157 (Nov. 22, 2000) and 2000 FTC LEXIS 138 (Sept. 19,2000); and In re Basic Research, Inc., 2006 FTC LEXIS 14 

(Jan. 25,2006) 

PPAB 1576507vl 
rationale of Commission decisions" warants in camera treatment. General Foods Corp., 95 

FTC 352 (1980). The exhibits at issue in this Fourh Motion are listed in the index attached 

hereto as Exhibit A and are being provided electronically herewith on Exhibit C. 

The grounds for this Fourh Motion are set forth herein, and this Fourh Motion is fully 

supported by the sworn Fourh Declaration of Michael Shor ("Shor DecL.") attached hereto as 

Exhibit B and which individually analyzes each exhibit listed on Exhibit A. 

Introduction 

As Respondent wil demonstrate herein and in the supporting Fourth Declaration of 

Michael Shor, the public disclosure of the three exhibits identified in Exhibit A hereto, wil 

likely result in a clearly defined, serious injur to Respondent, thus justifying in camera 

treatment under the standard ariculated by the Commission in In re Dura Lube Corp., 1999 FTC 

LEXIS 255 (Dec. 23 1999); In re Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., 2000 FTC LEXIS 157 (Nov. 22, 

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

LEXIS 14 (Jan. 25, 2006). 

The three exhibits identified in Exhibit A contain confidential information that is 

paramount to Polypore's business, competitiveness, and profitabilty. Indeed, revealing such 

information would, among other things: (1) 
 allow Polypore's competitors to gain a commercial 

advantage through knowledge of Polypore's pricing strategies, production capacities, technical 

know-how, and manufacturing processes; (2) give Polypore's customers a tactical advantage in 

futue negotiations with Polypore; and (3) enable suppliers to peg the prices they charge 

Polypore. At the very least, disclosure of the information Polypore seeks to protect would 

deprive Polypore of its curent bargaining position with customers and suppliers; at worst, 

competitors would be allowed unfettered access to Respondent's confidential and sensitive 

documents which wil inevitably create a less competitive marketplace and har competition. 

2 

PPAB 1576507vl 
Continued confidentiality of 
 these documents is key to maintaining Polypore's ability to develop, 

market, and sell its products in this competitive market dominated by powerful buyers. 

Argument 

Pursuant to Commission Rule 3.45(b), the Administrative Law Judge may order material, 

or portions thereof, offered into evidence. . . to be placed in camera on a finding that their public 

disclosure wil 
 likely result "in a clearly defined, serious injur to the . . corporation requesting 

in camera treatment." 16 C.F.R. § 3.45(b)(emphasis added). Establishing that a serious injur 

would ensue with disclosure requires a demonstration that serious and irreparable har wil 

result from the Court's publication of the confidential documents. Meeting such a standard 

requires Respondent to make a clear showing that the information concerned is "sufficiently 

secret and sufficiently material to (Respondent's) business that disclosure would result in serious 

competitive injur." See Bristol-Myers Co., 90 FTC 455 (1977), General Foods Corp., 95 FTC 

352 (1980). 

In Bristol-Myers, 90 FTC 455 (1977), the Commission outlined six factors to be weighed 

when determining materiality and secrecy: (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; (3) the extent of measures taken by 

the applicant to guard the secrecy of the information; (4) the value of the 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. Additionally, the Commission has expounded on the 

definition of "serious injury," stating "(t)he likely loss of business advantages is a good example 

of a clearly defined, serious injur." Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., 2000 FTC LEXIS 138 (Sept. 

19, 2000). 

3 

PPAB 1576507vl 
As set forth below and in the Fourh Declaration of 
 Michael Shor, the three exhibits listed 

in Exhibit A contain information sufficiently secret, and suffciently material to Polypore's 

business, that disclosure constitutes a serious competitive injury under the Bristol-Myers factors 

and prevailing Commission law. 

I. IN CAMERA TREATMENT IS WARRNTED FOR THE FOLLOWING
 

POLYPORE DOCUMENTS 

(Redacted - Subject to Pending Motion for In Camera Treatment). 

Conclusion 

(Redacted - Subject to Pending Motion for In Camera Treatment). For the foregoing 

reasons and those ariculated in the Fourh Declaration of Michael Shor, Polypore respectfully
 

requests that this Cour grant in camera protection to all the documents identified on Exhibit A. 

4 

PPAB 1576507vl 
Dated: June 17,2009 Respectfully submitted, 

wÆ-12L f /rStZW
 

Wiliam L. Rikard, Jr. i.. .
 

Eric D. Welsh 

PARKR POE ADAMS & BERNSTEIN, LLP 

Three Wachovia Center 

401 South Tryon Street, Suite 3000 

Charlotte, NC 28202 

Telephone: (704) 372-9000 

Facsimile: (704) 335-9689 

wiliamikard~parkerpoe.com 

ericwelsh~parkerpoe.com 

John F. Graybeal 

PARKR POE ADAMS & BERNSTEIN, LLP 

150 Fayettevile Street 

Raleigh, NC 27602 

Telephone: (919) 835-4599 

Facsimile: (919) 828-0564 

johngraybeal~parkerpoe.com 

Attorneys for Respondent 

PPAB 1576507vl 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

) Docket No. 9327 

)

Polypore International, Inc. )


a corporation
 ) 

) 

PROPOSED ORDER 

Upon consideration of Respondent's Fourh Motion for In Camera Treatment of Certain 

Trial Exhibits, any opposition thereto, any hearing thereon, and the entire record in this 

proceeding, 

IT is HEREBY ORDERED, that Respondent's Motion is GRANTED. 

IT is FURTHER ORDERED, that pursuant to Rule 3.45(b) of the Federal Trade 

Commission Rules of Practice, 16 C.F.R.§ 3.45(b), the documents identified in the index 

attached as Exhibit A to the Motion, and any related trial testimony, shall be subject to the 

requested in camera treatment and will be kept confidential and not placed on the public record 

of this proceeding. 

D. Michael Chappell 

Administrative Law Judge 

Date: 

PP AB 1 576507v 1 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
 

I hereby certify that on June 18, 2009, I caused to be fied via hand delivery and 

electronic mail delivery an original and two copies of the foregoing Respondent's Fourth 

Motion for In Camera Treatment of Certain Trial Exhibits ¡PUBLIC), and that the electronic 

copy is a true and correct copy of the paper original and that a paper copy with an original 

signature is being filed with: 

Donald S. Clark, Secretary 

Office of the Secretary 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Rm. H-135 

Washington, DC 20580 

secretarv~ftc.gov 

I hereby certify that on June 17,2009, I caused to be served one copy via electronic mail 

delivery and two copies via hand delivery of the foregoing Respondent's Fourth Motion for In 

Camera Treatment of Certain Trial Exhibits ¡PUBLIC) upon: 

The Honorable D. Michael Chappell 

Administrative Law Judge 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

oalj~ftc.gov 

I hereby certify that on June 17, 2009, I caused to be served via hand delivery and 

electronic mail delivery a copy of the foregoing Respondent's Fourth Motion for In Camera 

Treatment of Certain Trial Exhibits ¡PUBLIC) upon: 

1. Robert Robertson, Esq. Steven Dah, Esq. 

Federal Trade Commission Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 Washington, DC 20580 

rrobertson~ftc.gov sdah~ftc.gov 

B?:~wey&:P

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP 

Three Wachovia Center 

401 South Tryon Street, Suite 3000 

Charlotte, NC 28202 

Telephone: (704) 335-9534 

Facsimile: (704) 335-9776 

PPAB 1576507vl 
v It o 0
 

cø cø
 

"I "I
 000
 

= = =
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) Docket No. 9327 

) 

) 

Polypore International, Inc. 

a corporation 

) 

) 

) PUBLIC DOCUMENT. 

) 

FOURTH DECLARATION OF MICHAEL SHOR 

I, Michael Shor, being duly sworn and based upon my personal knowledge, declare and 

state as follows: 

1. I am Special Counsel of Respondent Polypore International, Inc. ("Polypore").
 

2. I am familiar with the documents of Polypore and the level of confidentiality associated
 

with the subject matter therein. 

3. I submit this declaration in support of Polypore's Fourh Motion for In Camera
 

Treatment of Certain Trial Exhibits, requesting in camera treatment of three exhibits 

admitted into evidence in this matter. 

4. The three exhibits identified in Exhibit A of Polypore's Fourh Motion for In Camera
 

Treatment of Certain Trial Exhibits satisfy the Commission's strict standards for in 

camera treatment. 

i This Declaration refers to and contains information subject to Respondent's Fourth Motion for In Camera Treatment 

of Certain Trial Exhibits pursuant to Rule 3.45(b) of the FTC's Rules. of Practice. Such information has been redacted and 

labeled "(Redacted - Subject to Pending Motion for In Camera Treatment)" in the public version of this Declaration. 

PPAB 1576430vl 
5. I am personally informed of the content of the individual exhibits at issue in Polypore's
 

Fourh Motion for In Camera Treatment of Certain Trial Exhibits, and the specific bases 

upon which Polypore is moving for in camera treatment of such exhibits. 

6. Each of the three exhibits identified in Exhibit A of Polypore's Fourh Motion for In 

Camera Treatment of Certain Trial Exhibits, and individually described herein, contains 

sensitive and confidential material and/or information that would result in competitive 

injur to Polypore should it be made public.
 

7. Each of these three exhibits has been maintained internally by Polypore in a confidential
 

maner, only being shared with those individuals requiring the knowledge contained 

within the documents. 

8. Exhibit A to Polypore's Fourh Motion for In Camera Treatment of Certain Trial
 

Exhibits is an index which lists each document for which Polypore seeks in camera 

treatment. This index contains the exhibit designation (i. e., "RX" or "PX"), the exhibit 

number, a description of the exhibit, the date of the exhibit, and the length of time for 

which in camera treatment is sought. 

9. (Redacted - Subject to Pending Motion for In Camera Treatment).
 

1 O. Prior to this administrative proceeding, the information contained in the exhibits
 

identified by Polypore for in camera treatment has been revealed only to appropriate 

Polypore personneL. General Polypore employees do not have access to the documents 

containing in camera materiaL. Such information is not in the public domain and cannot 

be obtained through other means. 

PPAB 1576430vl 
11. As such, the documents at issue in Polypore's Fourh Motion for In Camera Treatment of
 

Certain Trial Exhibits, and identified in Exhibit A thereto, are sensitive material to 

PoIypore's business, competitiveness, and profitabilty. Disclosure of the information
 

contained in these documents will result in the loss of business advantages by Polypore 

and will cause Polypore serious irreparable injury. 

PPAB 1576430vl 
I declare, under penalty of perjur, that the above statements are true and correct.
 

This 114day of June, 2009.
 

Charlotte, North Carolina
 

Mic ael Shor, Esq.
 

NOTARD: ~-?nazOc)j, I( U.~((
 

. . ~'l 'Ai~ _. . .. \.u.l. aid 0 (il ..~~~ ~..\ ~ 0; !" I
 i 1-.. ..0' A R ~ \

\~ ,.uø\.~ ~./
 \,,~ £ ,/ '~~, ~ \,"


.,.r;/V COy,.,.'" ".,.,,,.....'
 

,..,,,1.'
 

PPAB 1576430VL 
..
 

'..,