LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

US v AMR CORP AMERICAN AIRLINES INC and AMR EAGLE HOLDING CORPORATION Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: 41, CourtName: FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION II, Plaintiff: US, State: KS Kansas, UniqueCaseRef: LCD>41, CourtCode: FED, Respondents, Commission, Agreement, Divestiture Trustee, Store, American, Supermercados Amigo, Federal Trade Commission, Consent, Cid, Materials, Assets, United States, Class Plaintiffs, Trade Commission Act, Proposed Acquisition, Wal-mart Stores, Protective Order, Complaint, Supermarket, Motion, Third-party Cid, Discovery, Stipulated Protective Order, Confidentiality, Modify, Paragraph, Supermarket Business, Airlines Litigation, Puerto Rico, Jurisdictional Facts, Competition, Thereafter , ContentID: 120245958

Case Documents
1   DECISION AND ORDER
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 131017
10 pages
PDF
2 1999-09-14 COMMENTS ON 9-14-99 PROTECTIVE ORDER GOVERNING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 112971
9 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 2 documents , 19 pages
Price: $ 24.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . DECISION AND ORDER

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
COMMISSION
AGREEMENT
DIVESTITURE TRUSTEE
STORE
SUPERMERCADOS AMIGO
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
ASSETS
CONSENT
TRADE COMMISSION ACT
PROPOSED ACQUISITION
WAL-MART STORES
COMPLAINT
SUPERMARKET
PARAGRAPH
SUPERMARKET BUSINESS
PUERTO RICO
JURISDICTIONAL FACTS
ATTORNEYS
COMPETITION
THEREAFTER
NOTIFICATION
MANATI-VEGA BAJA ASSETS
PONCE ASSETS
CIDRA ASSETS
JURISDICTIONAL FACTS SET
CLAYTON ACT
CLUB STORE
SUPERCENTER
GROCERY PRODUCTS
                                                                                  021 0090

                                           UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
                                   BEFORE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION


COMMISSIONERS:                             Timothy J. Muris, Chairman
                                           Sheila F. Anthony
                                           Mozelle W. Thompson
                                           Orson Swindle
                                           Thomas B. Leary

__________________________________________
                                                                )
In the Matter of                                                )
                                                                )
            WAL-MART STORES, INC.,                              )
                        a corporation;                          )
                                                                )         Docket No. C-
                        and                                     )
                                                                )
            SUPERMERCADOS AMIGO, INC.,                          )
                        a corporation.                          )
__________________________________________)

                                               DECISION AND ORDER

            The Federal Trade Commission ("Commission") having initiated an investigation of the
proposed acquisition of 100% of the outstanding voting securities of Respondent Supermercados
Amigo, Inc. by Respondent Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "Respondents," and
Respondents having been furnished thereafter with a copy of a draft Complaint that the Bureau of
Competition proposed to present to the Commission for its consideration and which, if issued by the
Commission, would charge Respondents with violations of Section 7 of the Clayton Act, as amended,
15 U.S.C. § 18, and Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 45;
and

            Respondents, their attorneys, and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed
Agreement Containing Consent Orders ("Consent Agreement"), containing an admission by
Respondents of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the aforesaid draft of Complaint, a
the signing of said Consent Agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an
admission by Respondents that the law has been violated as alleged in such Complaint, or that the


alleged in such Complaint, other than jurisdictional facts, are true, and waivers and other
required by the Commission's Rules; and

          The Commission having thereafter considered the matter and having determined that it has
reason to believe that Respondents have violated the said Acts, and that a Complaint should issue
stating its charges in that respect, and having thereupon issued its Complaint and an Order to
SNIPPETS:
  • The Federal Trade Commission having initiated an investigation of the proposed acquisition of with violations of Section 7 of the Clayton Act, as amended,
  • Respondents, their attorneys, and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an
  • Respondent Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. is a corporation organized, existing and doing business
  • Respondent Supermercados Amigo, Inc. is a corporation organized, existing, and doing
  • A-1, Puerto Nuevo, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00920.
  • E. "Assets To Be Divested" means the Cidra Assets, the Ponce Assets and the Manati-Vega Baja
  • "Divestiture Trustee" means any person or entity appointed by the Commission pursuant to
  • L. "Cidra Assets" means the Supermarket currently operated by Respondent Amigo under the dents' trademarks, trade dress, service marks, or trade names.
  • for sale in the ordinary course of the Supermarket business may be excluded from the
  • O. "Supermarket" means any store that offers a Wide Selection and Deep Inventory of Food and
  • P. "Supercenter" means any Supermarket that is co-located with a mass merchandise outlet.
  • Q. "Club Store" means any store that offers a Wide Selection and Deep Inventory of Food and
  • The purpose of the divestitures is to ensure the continuation of the Cidra Assets, the Ponce
  • The Commission may appoint a different Divestiture Trustee to accomplish each of the
  • In the event that the Commission or the Attorney General brings an action pursuant to § 5of
  • Respondents shall select such entity within five Business Days of receiving notification of
  • Provided, however, that prior notification shall not be required by this Paragraph for a

  • 2 . COMMENTS ON 9-14-99 PROTECTIVE ORDER GOVERNING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    CID
    MATERIALS
    UNITED STATES
    CLASS PLAINTIFFS
    PROTECTIVE ORDER
    MOTION
    THIRD-PARTY CID
    DISCOVERY
    STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER
    CONFIDENTIALITY
    MODIFY
    AIRLINES LITIGATION
    AMERICAN AIRLINES
    PRODUCTION
    COURT
    DISCLOSURE
    PROPOSED MODIFICATION
    GOVERNMENT
    PURSUANT
    DESIGNATIONS
    MASTER FILE
    ANTITRUST
    CID STATUTE
    MEMORANDUM
    REQUEST
    EXHIBIT
    CIVIL
    CONSENT
    OBTAINING
    
                           IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                                  FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
    
    
                                              )
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                 ))
                           Plaintiff,         ))          Civil Action No.: 99-1180-JTM
                   v.                         ))
    AMR CORPORATION,                          )
    AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., and              )
    AMR EAGLE HOLDING                         )
    CORPORATION,                              ))
                           Defendants.        ))
    
                PLAINTIFF'S COMMENTS REGARDING MODIFICATION
                   OF THE COURT'S SEPTEMBER 14, 1999 STIPULATED
         PROTECTIVE ORDER GOVERNING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
    
           Plaintiff United States submits this memorandum to clarify its position regarding
    
    American's Motion to Modify the Court's September 14, 1999 Stipulated Protective Order
    
    Governing Confidential Information ("September 14 Order").   American seeks modification
                                                                      1
    
    
    of the September 14 Order to allow it to comply with certain discovery orders in In re
    
    
    
    1      In its Supplemental Motion, American states that the United States asked American to
    clarify the position of the United States in this matter.  While the United States notified American
    that American's original Motion to Modify did not accurately represent the position that the
    United States had previously communicated to American's counsel, the United States did not ask
    American to file a Supplemental Motion, and has always intended to file its own response to
    American's Motion to Modify.
    
    PLAINTIFF'S COMMENTS REGARDING AMERICAN'S MOTION TO MODIFY
    SEPTEMBER 14, 1999 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER -- 1
    
    
    
    American Airlines Antitrust Litigation, Master File No. 99-1187-JTM.  Plaintiffs in In re
    
    American Airlines Litigation, Master File No. 99-1187-JTM ("Class Plaintiffs") have filed
    
    a response to American's motion.  The only issue as to which the United States, American,
    
    and the Class Plaintiffs are not in agreement is the propriety of modifying the September 14
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • 1999 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER GOVERNING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
  • Plaintiff United States submits this memorandum to clarify its position regarding
  • American's Motion to Modify the Court's September 14, 1999 Stipulated Protective Order
  • In its Supplemental Motion, American states that the United States asked American to clarify
  • While the United States notified American that American's original Motion to Modify did not
  • American Airlines Antitrust Litigation, Master File No. 99-1187-JTM.
  • American Airlines Litigation, Master File No. 99-1187-JTM ("Class Plaintiffs") have filed
  • Order to allow the disclosure to Class Plaintiffs of materials received by the United States
  • issued pursuant to the Antitrust Civil Process Act, 15 U.S.C. §§1311, et seq.
  • statute") -- without the consent of the owners of those documents.
  • of the confidentiality of information obtained by CID.
  • Discovery has been stayed in In re American Airlines Litigation,
  • attached as Exhibit E to American's May 25 Memorandum,
  • allow American to disclose third-party CID materials produced to American by the United
  • either directs or permits the production of third-party CID materials to Class Plaintiffs;
  • confidentiality designations applicable to third-party CID materials.
  • Judge Marten issued an order granting American's request to stay discovery in In re
  • to continue providing Class Plaintiffs with copies of documents "produced to the government
  • the United States pursuant to Civil Investigative Demands pursuant to the DOJ
  • proposed modification allowing American to produce materials received from third-parties
  • The CID statute ensures the continued confidentiality of CID
  • obtaining third-party CID materials directly from American.
  •    |