†
HR 1086 EAS
(B) in the last sentence by inserting ‘‘or
available to such organization, as the case may
be’’ before the period,
(3) in subsection (d)(2) by inserting ‘‘, or the
standards development activity,’’ after ‘‘venture’’,
(4) in subsection (e)—
(A) by striking ‘‘person who’’ and inserting
‘‘person or standards development organization
that’’, and
(B) by inserting ‘‘or any standards develop-
ment organization’’ after ‘‘person’’ the last place
it appears, and
(5) in subsection (g)(1) by inserting ‘‘or stand-
ards development organization’’ after ‘‘person’’.
SEC. 108. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this title shall be construed to alter or mod-
ify the antitrust treatment under existing law of—
(1) parties participating in standards develop-
ment activity of standards development organizations
within the scope of this title, including the existing
standard under which the conduct of the parties is re-
viewed, regardless of the standard under which the
conduct of the standards development organizations
in which they participate are reviewed, or
†
HR 1086 EAS
(2) other organizations and parties engaged in
standard-setting processes not within the scope of this
amendment to the title.
TITLE II—ANTITRUST CRIMINAL
PENALTY ENHANCEMENT AND
REFORM ACT OF 2003
SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ‘‘Antitrust Criminal
Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 2003’’.
Subtitle A—Antitrust Enforcement
Enhancements and Cooperation
Incentives
SEC. 211. SUNSET.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subsection
(b), the provisions of sections 211 through 214 shall cease
to have effect 5 years after the date of enactment of this
Act.
(b) EXCEPTION.—With respect to an applicant who
has entered into an antitrust leniency agreement on or be-
fore the date on which the provisions of sections 211 through
214 of this subtitle shall cease to have effect, the provisions
of sections 211 through 214 of this subtitle shall continue
in effect.
SEC. 212. DEFINITIONS.
In this subtitle:
†
HR 1086 EAS
(1) ANTITRUST DIVISION.—The term ‘‘Antitrust
Division’’ means the United States Department of
Justice Antitrust Division.
(2) ANTITRUST
LENIENCY
AGREEMENT.—The
term ‘‘antitrust leniency agreement,’’ or ‘‘agreement,’’
means a leniency letter agreement, whether condi-
tional or final, between a person and the Antitrust
Division pursuant to the Corporate Leniency Policy
of the Antitrust Division in effect on the date of exe-
cution of the agreement.
(3) ANTITRUST LENIENCY APPLICANT.—The term
‘‘antitrust leniency applicant,’’ or ‘‘applicant,’’
means, with respect to an antitrust leniency agree-
ment, the person that has entered into the agreement.
(4) CLAIMANT.—The term ‘‘claimant’’ means a
person or class, that has brought, or on whose behalf
has been brought, a civil action alleging a violation
of section 1 or 3 of the Sherman Act or any similar
State law, except that the term does not include a
State or a subdivision of a State with respect to a
civil action brought to recover damages sustained by
the State or subdivision.
(5) COOPERATING INDIVIDUAL.—The term ‘‘co-
operating individual’’ means, with respect to an anti-
trust leniency agreement, a current or former direc-
†
HR 1086 EAS
tor, officer, or employee of the antitrust leniency ap-
plicant who is covered by the agreement.
(6) PERSON.—The term ‘‘person’’ has the mean-
ing given it in subsection (a) of the first section of the
Clayton Act.
SEC. 213. LIMITATION ON RECOVERY.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subsection (d), in any
civil action alleging a violation of section 1 or 3 of the Sher-
man Act, or alleging a violation of any similar State law,
based on conduct covered by a currently effective antitrust
leniency agreement, the amount of damages recovered by or
on behalf of a claimant from an antitrust leniency appli-
cant who satisfies the requirements of subsection (b), to-
gether with the amounts so recovered from cooperating indi-
viduals who satisfy such requirements, shall not exceed that
portion of the actual damages sustained by such claimant
which is attributable to the commerce done by the applicant
in the goods or services affected by the violation.
(b) REQUIREMENTS.—Subject to subsection (c), an
antitrust leniency applicant or cooperating individual sat-
isfies the requirements of this subsection with respect to a
civil action described in subsection (a) if the court in which
the civil action is brought determines, after considering any
appropriate pleadings from the claimant, that the appli-
cant or cooperating individual, as the case may be, has pro-
†
HR 1086 EAS
vided satisfactory cooperation to the claimant with respect
to the civil action, which cooperation shall include—
(1) providing a full account to the claimant of
all facts known to the applicant or cooperating indi-
vidual, as the case may be, that are potentially rel-
evant to the civil action;
(2) furnishing all documents or other items po-
tentially relevant to the civil action that are in the
possession, custody, or control of the applicant or co-
operating individual, as the case may be, wherever
they are located; and
(3)(A) in the case of a cooperating individual—
(i) making himself or herself available for
such interviews, depositions, or testimony in con-
nection with the civil action as the claimant
may reasonably require; and
(ii) responding completely and truthfully,
without making any attempt either falsely to
protect or falsely to implicate any person or en-
tity, and without intentionally withholding any
potentially relevant information, to all questions
asked by the claimant in interviews, depositions,
trials, or any other court proceedings in connec-
tion with the civil action; or
†
HR 1086 EAS
(B) in the case of an antitrust leniency appli-
cant, using its best efforts to secure and facilitate
from cooperating individuals covered by the agree-
ment the cooperation described in clauses (i) and (ii)
and subparagraph (A).
(c) TIMELINESS.—If the initial contact by the anti-
trust leniency applicant with the Antitrust Division re-
garding conduct covered by the antitrust leniency agree-
ment occurs after a State, or subdivision of a State, has
issued compulsory process in connection with an investiga-
tion of allegations of a violation of section 1 or 3 of the
Sherman Act or any similar State law based on conduct
covered by the antitrust leniency agreement or after a civil
action described in subsection (a) has been filed, then the
court shall consider, in making the determination con-
cerning satisfactory cooperation described in subsection (b),
the timeliness of the applicant’s initial cooperation with the
claimant.
(d) CONTINUATION.—Nothing in this section shall be
construed to modify, impair, or supersede the provisions of
sections 4, 4A, and 4C of the Clayton Act relating to the
recovery of costs of suit, including a reasonable attorney’s
fee, and interest on damages, to the extent that such recov-
ery is authorized by such sections.