0110214
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
In the Matter of
UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, a corporation.
DOCKET NO. 9305
COMPLAINT
Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and by
virtue of the authority vested in it by said Act, the Federal Trade
Commission ("Commission"), having reason to believe that Union Oil
Company of California (hereinafter, "Unocal" or "Respondent") has
violated Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") Act, as
amended, 15 U.S.C. § 45, and it appearing to the Commission that a
proceeding in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby
issues its complaint, stating its charges as follows:
Nature of the Case
1. This case involves Unocal's subversion of state regulatory
standard-setting proceedings relating to low emissions gasoline
standards. To address California's serious air pollution problems, the
California Air Resources Board ("CARB") initiated rulemaking
proceedings in the late 1980s to determine "cost-effective"
regulations and standards governing the composition of low emissions,
reformulated gasoline ("RFG"). Unocal actively participated in the
CARB RFG rulemaking proceedings and engaged in a pattern of bad-faith,
deceptive conduct, exclusionary in nature, that enabled it to
undermine competition and harm consumers. Through a pattern of
anticompetitive acts and practices that continues even today, Unocal
has illegally monopolized, attempted to monopolize, and otherwise
engaged in unfair methods of competition in both the technology market
for the production and supply of CARB-compliant "summer-time" RFG and
the downstream CARB "summer-time" RFG product market.
2. During the RFG rulemaking proceedings in 1990-1994, Unocal made
materially false and misleading statements including, but not limited
to, the following:
a. Representing to CARB and other participants that its
emissions research results showing, inter alia, the directional
relationships between certain gasoline properties (most notably
the midpoint distillation temperature of gasoline or "T50") on
automobile emissions were "nonproprietary," were in "the public
domain," or otherwise were available to CARB, industry members,
SNIPPETS:
BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA,
Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and by virtue of the
To address California's serious air pollution problems, the California Air Resources Board
Unocal actively participated in the CARB RFG rulemaking proceedings and engaged in a pattern
Representing to CARB that a "predictive model" -- i.e., a mathematical model that predicts
Making statements and comments to CARB and other industry participants relating to the
Through its knowing and willful misrepresentations and other bad faith, deceptive conduct,
Although Unocal knew by July 1992 that most of the pending patent claims based on its
Until Unocal's public announcement of its RFG patent rights on January 31, 1995, Unocal
the refining industry had spent billions of dollars in capital expenditures to modify their
Prior to and after the filing of the patent application on December 13, 1990, Unocal
Unocal's misrepresentations and materially false and misleading statements caused CARB to
WSPA commissioned, and submitted to CARB, three cost studies in connection with the CARB
In its complaint, Unocal seeks damages at the rate of 5.75 cents per gallon for all
Notice is hereby given to the Respondent that the fourth day of June, 2003, at 10 a.m., or
ou will have the right under the FTC Act to appear and show cause why an order should not be
|
