I ' .
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
, do Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530,
Plaintiff, CASE NUMBER
JUDGE: Thomas
V.
DECK TYPE:
INPUT/OUTPUT, INC.
11104 West Airport Blvd., Suite 200 DATE STAMP:
Stafford, TX 77477-2416,
and
THE LAITRAM CORPORATION
220 Laitram Lane
Harahan, LA 70123
Defendants,
COMPLAINT FOR CIVIL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF
REPORTING REOUlREMENTS OF THE HART-SCOTT-RODINO
The United States of America, Plaintiff, by its attorneys, acting
Attorney General of the United States and at the request of the Federal Trade
brings this civil action to obtain monetary relief in the form of civil
Defendants named herein, and alleges as follows:
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. This Complaint is filed and these proceedings are
the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 3 18a., commonly known as TitIe II of the
Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 ("HSR Act"), to recover civil penalties for
HSR Act.
2. This Court has jurisdiction over the Defendants and over
action pursuant to Section 7A(g) of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 4 18a(g), and
1337(a), 1345, and 1355.
3. Venue in this District is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $6 1391(b), 1391(c),
1395(a). Venue is also proper by virtue of the Defendants' consents, in the Stipulation relating
SNIPPETS:
The United States of America, Plaintiff, by its attorneys, acting under the direction of the
brings this civil action to obtain monetary relief in the form of civil penalties against the
the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 3 18a., commonly known as TitIe II of the Hart-Scott-Rodino
Venue in this District is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $6 1391, 1391, 1395.
Venue is also proper by virtue of the Defendants' consents, in the Stipulation relating
Input/Output manufactures and markets seismic data acquisition systems and related equipment
The Laitram Corporation is a Louisiana corporation headquartered in Harahan, Louisiana and is
Laitram owned 100% of the outstanding voting securities of DigiCOURSE,
At all times relevant to this complaint, Lapeyre, through his interest in Laitram, had annual
securities or assets will be acquired to file notifications with the Department of Justice
The notification and waiting period are intended to give the federal antitrust agencies prior
Where an acquisition is subject to the HSR Act, the acquiring person and the acquired person
Any person who fails to comply with any provision of the HSR Act is liable to the United
The maximum amount of civil penalty is $10,000 per day through November 19,1996, pursuant to
It is stipulated by and between the undersigned parties, by their respective attorneys, that:
consent, which it may do at any time before the entry of judgment by serving notice of its
c/o Department of Justice Washington,
commonly known as the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976,
Key features of the APPA are preparation by the United
courts to date have not required use of APPA procedures in cases involving only the
United States v. AXA Services, Inc., 1979-2 CCH Trade Cases fi 62,861, a consent
et al., 1997-2 Trade Cas.
|
