[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 123 (Tuesday, June 25, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 32858]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16141]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Antitrust Division


United States v. Baroid Corporation, et al., Civil Action No. 93-
2621 (D.D.C.); Proposed Modification of Final Judgment

    Notice is hereby given that the Department of Justice 
(``Department'') and Smith International Inc. (``Smith'') have filed 
with the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, a 
joint motion to modify the judgment in United States v. Baroid 
Corporation, et al., Civil Action No. 93-2621, and that the Department, 
in a stipulation also filed with the Court, has consented to 
modification of the Judgment but has reserved the right to withdraw its 
consent for at least seventy (70) days after the publication of this 
notice. The complaint in this case (filed December 23, 1993) alleged 
that the merger of Dresser Industries, Inc. (``Dresser'') and Baroid 
Corporation (``Baroid'') might substantially lessen competition in the 
United States in the manufacture and sale of two oil field service 
products, including drilling fluids, in violation of Section 7 of the 
Clayton Act. At the time the Judgment was entered, Dresser and Baroid 
were two of the three major U.S. producers of drilling fluids.
    On April 12, 1994, a Judgment was entered that resolved the 
merger's effect on the drilling fluids business by requiring Dresser to 
divest either its 64 percent partnership interest in M-I Drilling 
Fluids Company (``M-I'') or Baroid's wholly owned subsidiary, Baroid 
Drilling Fluids Inc. Pursuant to the divestiture requirement, Dresser 
sold its partnership interest in M-I to Smith.
    Paragraph IV.F. of the Final Judgment states that the purchaser of 
the divested drilling fluids business cannot combine that business with 
any one of four named companies. One of the four named companies is 
Anchor Drilling Fluids (``Anchor'').
    The joint motion to modify the final judgment would permit M-I to 
acquire Anchor subject to a divestiture agreement set forth in the 
joint motion to modify under which M-I would sell the United States 
operation of Anchor within a specified period of time. If M-I does not 
complete the divestiture by the allotted time, a trustee will be 
appointed to complete the divestiture.
    The divestiture agreement between the Department and Smith 
specifies the assets to be included in the divestiture package. Those 
assets include the right of the purchaser to obtain crude barite ore 
from M-I for a period of five years, with an option to extend that 
right for another five years. Barite is an essential ingredient in 
drilling fluids. The divestiture assets also include the right to use 
the Anchor name in the United States and the right to manufacture and 
sell Anchor brand drilling fluid products.
    The Department has filed with the Court a memorandum setting forth 
the reasons why the Government believes the modification of the 
Judgment would serve the public interest. Copies of the Complaint and 
Judgment, the Joint Motion to Modify Final Judgment and Divestiture 
Agreement, the Stipulation containing the Government's consent, the 
Department's memorandum, and all further papers filed with the Court in 
connection with this motion will be available for inspection at Room 
215, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 325 7th St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20530 and at the Office of the Clerk of the United 
States District Court for the District of Columbia, Third Street and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20001. Copies of any of 
these materials may be obtained from the Antitrust Division upon 
request and payment of the copying fee set by Department of Justice 
regulations.
    Interested persons may submit comments regarding the proposed 
modification of the decree to the Government. Such comments must be 
received by the Antitrust Division within sixth (60) days and will be 
filed with the Court by the Government. Comments should be addressed to 
Roger W. Fones, Chief, Transportation, Energy, and Agriculture Section, 
Antitrust Division, Suite 500, 325 7th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20530, (202-307-6351).
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations.
[FR Doc. 96-16141 Filed 6-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M