Q,R lGlNAL 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

.;4'6 9 ~1 

øc 1., 1l~V 

S-~J-O 5'7 

In the Matter of ) Docket No. 9327 

) Polypore International, Inc., ) PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

a corporation. ) 

RESPONDENT'S OBJECTIONS TO COMPLAINT COUNSEL'S 

FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS 

Pursuant to the Federal Trade Commission's Rules of Practice for Adjudicative 

Proceedings ("FTC Rules"), 16 C.F.R. §§ 3.31 and 3.35, Respondent Polypore International, Inc. 

("Polypore"), by its attorneys, Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP, hereby submits its objections 

to Complaint Counsel's First Request For Admissions ("Requests"), which was served on 

October 19, 2009. 

OBJECTIONS 

1. Respondent objects to the Requests on the basis that the Administrative Law
 

Judge's Order Granting Respondent's Second Motion to Reopen the Hearing Record and Setting 

Hearing Schedule, dated October 15, 2009, makes no provision for additional requests for 

admission. The Court's Order does not contemplate any written discovery, only depositions, in 

advance of the half-day hearing scheduled to occur in two weeks. Respondent has not served 

any written discovery requests on Complaint Counsel. Nor has Respondent sought documentary 

evidence from third-pary Exide Texhnologies, Inc. by subpoena duces tecum, as Respondent 

believes the Court's order does not authorize such discovery. 

2. Respondent objects to the Requests on the basis that the FTC Rules provide no
 

authorization for Compliant Counsel's serving requests for admission related to a limited proffer 

of evidence in a half-day re-opened hearing after the record has been closed. 

PPAB 1618927vl 

- "" - .. .. .. .- "i 
3. Respondent objects to the Requests on the basis that Complaint Counsel's
 

demand for answers to such Requests is contrary to the FTC Rules. 

4. Respondent objects to the Requests as overly broad, unduly burdensome,
 

impermissibly vague or ambiguous, or require unreasonable efforts or expense on the part of 

Respondent in an extraordinarily short time frame while Respondent is simultaneously preparing 

witnesses for depositions and the hearing. 

5. Respondent objects to the Requests to the extent that it seeks information in 

existence and available to Complaint Counsel prior to the close of the record and/or unelated to 

Respondent's proffer made to the Court in its Second Motion to Reopen the Record. 

6. Respondent objects to the Requests to the extent that they seek information
 

protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work-product doctrine, the joint defense privilege 

or any other applicable privilege. 

7. Respondent objects to the Requests to the extent that they seek to impose
 

obligations boarder than those required by or authorized under the FTC Rules, the Federal Rules 

of Civil Procedure, the Court's Order Granting Respondent's Second Motion to Reopen the 

Hearing Record and Setting Hearing Schedule, or any applicable order or rule of this Cour. 

8. Respondent objects to the Requests to the extent that they are not reasonably 

expected to yield information relevant to the limited proffer of evidence authorized by the Order 

Granting Respondent's Second Motion to Reopen the Hearing Record and Setting Hearing 

Schedule. 

2 

PPAB 1618927vl 

--., --'- .. - --~----., - -'l 
9. Respondent objects to Complaint Counsel's definitions of "Polypore," "the
 

company," "you," "your," "Daramic" and "Microporous," as being overbroad and unduly
 

burdensome. Respondent does not agree to the characterization of these terms and any response 

should not be considered a waiver of 
 this objection. 

10. Respondent objects to Complaint Counsel's definition of "Document" as being
 

vague, overbroad and unduly burdensome. Respondent does not agree to the characterization of 

this terms and any response should not be considered a waiver of 
 this objection. 

11. Respondent objects to the Requests to the extent they require Respondent to 

respond on behalf of third paries. In paricular, Complaint Counsel's definitions of "Polypore"
 

and "Microporous" are overly broad because it requires Respondent to respond on behalf of 

multiple other entities. 

12. Respondent's responses to these Requests are given without prejudice to 

Respondent's right to produce evidence of any subsequently discovered facts. The failure of 

Respondent to object to any Request on a particular ground may not be construed as a waiver of 

its right to object on any additional ground(s). 

13. Respondent objects to the Requests to the extent they call for information that can 

only be obtained from third paries. 

14. Respondent reserves the right to assert additional specific objections should the 

Court grant Complaint Counsel's Motion to Compel Production of Discovery Responses. 

3 

PPAB 1618927vl 

-., - .. ..-­
Dated: October 21, 2009 Respectfully submitted, 

Wi W~ L. (2 kA /M~ 

Wiliam L. Rikard, Jr. 

Eric D. Welsh 

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein, LLP 

Three Wachovia Center 

401 South Tryon Street, Suite 3000 

Charlotte, NC 28202 

Telephone: (704) 335-9011 

Facsimile: (704) 334-4706 

willamikard~parkerpoe.com 

ericwelsh~parkerpoe.com 

John F. Graybeal 

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein, LLP 

Wachovia Capitol Center 

150 Fayettevile Street, Suite 1400 

Raleigh, NC 27601 

Telephone: (919) 835-4599 

Facsimile: (919) 834-4564 

johngraybeal~parkerpoe.com 

Attorneys for Respondent 

4
 

PPAB 1618927vl 

--- .. .. 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
 

I hereby certify that on October 21, 2009, I caused to be fied via hand delivery and 

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

Complaint Counsel's First Requests for Admissions 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
 

secretary~ftc.gov
 

I hereby certify that on October 21, 2009, I caused to be served one copy via electronic 

mail delivery and two copies via overnight mail delivery of the foregoing Respondent's
 

Objections to Complaint Counsel's First Requests/or Admissions upon: 

The Honorable D. Michael Chappell
 

Administrative Law Judge
 

Federal Trade Commission
 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
 

Washington, DC 20580
 

I hereby certify that on October 21,2009, I caused to be served via first-class mail delivery 

and electronic mail delivery a copy of the foregoing Respondent's Objections to Complaint 

Counsel's First Requests/or Admissions 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 sdahm~ftc.gov 

~ C. ~f,IL() /MW


Adam C. Shearer l
 

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP 

Three Wachovia Center 

401 South Tryon Street, Suite 3000 

Charlotte, NC 28202 

Telephone: (704) 372-9000 

Facsimile: (704) 334-4706 

., 

PPAB 1618927vl 

-.,