Information

Date: 
Wednesday, September 6, 1995
Document Type: 
Informations
This document is available in two formats: this web page (for browsing content) and PDF (comparable to original document formatting). To view the PDF you will need Acrobat Reader, which may be downloaded from the Adobe site. For an official signed copy, please contact the Antitrust Documents Group.


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA    

                  v.

DYNO NOBEL INC.,

                  Defendant.


|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|         
Filed:

Crim. No.

15 U.S.C. § 1

INFORMATION

The United States of America, acting through its attorneys, charges:

1. DYNO NOBEL INC. is made a defendant.

COUNT ONE
I.
DESCRIPTION OF THE OFFENSE

2. Beginning sometime in the Fall of 1988 and continuing at least into mid-1992, the exact dates being unknown to the United States, the defendant and co-conspirators entered into and engaged in a combination and conspiracy to fix prices on the sale of certain commercial explosives in western Kentucky, southern Indiana and southern Illinois ("West Kentucky Region"). The combination and conspiracy unreasonably restrained interstate trade and commerce in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1.

3. The combination and conspiracy consisted of a continuing agreement, understanding and concert of action among the defendant and co-conspirators to fix prices, allocate customers, and rig bids on certain commercial explosives offered for sale in the West Kentucky Region.

4. For the purpose of forming and carrying out the charged combination and conspiracy in the West Kentucky Region, the defendant and co-conspirators did the following things, among others:

  1. discussed and agreed upon increases in certain prices on certain commercial explosives;
  2. discussed and agreed upon allocating certain customers among themselves;
  3. discussed and agreed upon bids or price quotes to certain customers for certain commercial explosives; and
  4. carried out their agreement.

II.
DEFENDANT AND CO-CONSPIRATORS

5. The defendant, formerly known as IRECO Incorporated, is a Delaware corporation headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah. The defendant is engaged in the manufacture, distribution and sale of commercial explosives throughout the United States. At all times relevant to this Information, the defendant did business in the West Kentucky Region and in Texas through a network of partially owned or wholly owned subsidiary distributors.

6. Various persons and firms, not made defendants in this Information, participated as co-conspirators in the charged combination and conspiracy, and performed acts and made statements in furtherance of it.

7. Whenever this Information refers to any act, deed or transaction of any corporation, it means that the corporation engaged in the act, deed or transaction by or through its officers, directors, agents, employees or other representatives while they were actively engaged in the management, direction, control or transaction of its business or affairs.

III.
TRADE AND COMMERCE

8. Commercial explosives are chemical products, such as high explosives and blasting agents, initiating devices and accessories that are used in the coal and metal mining, quarry and construction industries.

9. During the period covered by this Information, the defendant and co-conspirators sold and distributed commercial explosives in the West Kentucky Region that were manufactured outside that Region. These commercial explosives were shipped in a continuous and uninterrupted flow of interstate commerce from their places of manufacture to customers located in the West Kentucky Region.

10. The activities of the defendant and co-conspirators that are the subject of this Information were within the flow of, and substantially affected, interstate trade and commerce.

IV.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE

11. The combination and conspiracy charged in Count One of this Information was carried out, in part, within the Northern District of Texas within the five years preceding the filing of this Information.

COUNT TWO
I.
DESCRIPTION OF THE OFFENSE

12. Each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 5 through 8 and 10 are realleged with the same force and effect as if fully set forth in this Count.

13. Beginning sometime in the Fall of 1990 and continuing through 1992, the exact dates being unknown to the United States, the defendant and co-conspirators entered into and engaged in a combination and conspiracy to suppress and eliminate competition by allocating three limestone quarry accounts located in central Texas that purchased certain commercial explosives. The combination and conspiracy unreasonably restrained interstate trade and commerce in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1.

14. The combination and conspiracy consisted of a continuing agreement, understanding and concert of action among the defendant and co-conspirators to allocate among themselves three limestone quarry accounts in central Texas that purchased certain commercial explosives: the Lafarge Corporation quarry at New Braunfels, the Redland Stone quarry at San Antonio and the Texas Crushed Stone quarry at Georgetown, Texas.

15. For the purpose of forming and carrying out the charged combination and conspiracy, the defendant and co-conspirators did the following things, among others:

  1. discussed and agreed to allocate the Lafarge Corporation quarry account, the Redland Stone quarry account and the Texas Crushed Stone quarry account among themselves;
  2. discussed and agreed upon prices or price levels for certain commercial explosives to be bid or quoted to Lafarge Corporation, Redland Stone and Texas Crushed Stone; and
  3. carried out their agreement.

II.
TRADE AND COMMERCE

16. During the period covered by this Information, the defendant and co-conspirators sold and distributed commercial explosives in Texas that were manufactured outside of Texas. These commercial explosives were shipped in a continuous and uninterrupted flow of interstate commerce from their places of manufacture to customers located in Texas.

III.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

17. The combination and conspiracy charged in Count Two of this Information was carried out, in part, within the Northern District of Texas within the five years preceding the filing of this Information.

ALL IN VIOLATION OF TITLE 15, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 1.

Dated:

__________________________________
JOEL I. KLEIN
Acting Assistant Attorney General

__________________________________
GARY R. SPRATLING
Deputy Assistant Attorney General

__________________________________
ANTHONY V. NANNI
Chief, Litigation I Section
Antitrust Division
U.S. Department of Justice

__________________________________
TERRENCE F. McDONALD
Texas Bar No. 13559525

__________________________________
KATHERINE A. SCHLECH
Virginia Bar No. 17947

Attorneys
Antitrust Division
U.S. Department of Justice
1401 H Street, N.W., Suite
4000
Washington, D.C. 20530
(202) 307-1159

Attachments: 
Download 1076.pdf (18.11 KB)
Updated June 30, 2015