|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.|
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MOTION TO ENTER ORDER MODIFYING FINAL JUDGMENT
The United States moves this Court to enter the order modifying Paragraph V.F. of the Final Judgment entered in this case, and in support of this motion, states as follows:
1. On March 30, 2000, the United States and Diamond Products International ("DPI") jointly moved to modify the second sentence of Paragraph V.F. of the Final Judgment entered in this case on April 12, 1994. The second sentence of Paragraph V.F. presently states that DPI, as the purchaser of Baroid's diamond bit business, "shall not sell that business to, or combine that business with the diamond drill bit operations of, Dresser Industries, Inc., Baker Hughes, Inc., Camco, Inc., Smith International, Inc., or any of their affiliates or subsidiaries during the life of this decree." The proposed modification would change the provision with respect to Baker Hughes, Camco (now owned by Schlumberger), or Smith or any of their affiliates or subsidiaries from a prohibition to a notice provision.
2. The United States tentatively consented to the proposed modification, subject to a 60-day comment period following publication of a notice of the proposed modification in a newspaper of general circulation in the District of Columbia and in the Federal Register.
3. Notice of the proposed modification was published in the Federal Register on April 19, 2000 at Volume 65, No. 16, at page 3977, and in The Washington Post, a newspaper of general circulation in the District of Columbia, on January 11-January 17, 2000. The public had sixty days to submit comments, beginning on January 25, 2000 and ending on June 19, 2000.
4. The United States received one comment about the proposed modification. That comment was submitted by Halliburton Company, the successor to the defendants. The United States is today filing separately a copy of the comment and the United States' response to the comment.
5. The United States continues to believe the proposed modification is in the public interest. Halliburton and DPI have advised the United States that they may wish to make a filing in this matter. Therefore, the United States requests that the Court delay ruling on the motion to modify the Final Judgment for ten days to allow these companies to make a filing and, in the event that either company files, to allow the United States ten days thereafter to reply.
Dated: September 6, 2000
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 6th day of September, 2000, I have caused a copy of the foregoing Motion to Enter Order Modifying Final Judgment to be served on counsel for defendants and other affected companies by first class mail, postage prepared, and by facsimile.
Counsel for Baker Hughes, Inc.:
Sean F. X. Boland, Esquire