Document Ed3Q1ay79jxje80rxLDbdj6q0

Trade Regulation Reports--Number 256 JOINT RESEARCH Capacitors (the PCB problem)--Justice clearance ... A proposed joint research venture to develop a new insulation for alternating current capacitors, Undertaken liy six firms, will not presently be opposed under the antitrust laws, the Department of Justice advised the firms. A business review letter had been sent to the firms October 15; it was announced November 16. The six capacitor manufacturers making the business review request were: Acrovox Industries, Inc., New Bedford, Massachusetts; Universal Manufacturing Corporation, Bridgeport, Connecticut; Mallory Capacitor Company, Huntsville, Alabama; Jard Company, Inc., Bennington, Vermont; Electrical Utilities Com pany, Inc., LaSalle, Illinois; and Cornell Dubilier Electric Corporation, New Bedford, Massachusetts. Subsequent to the initial request, counsel for the venture 1 informed the Division that Mallory and Jard intended to withdraw from the project, the government said. The proposed joint venture will be directed solely toward the discovery and testing of a new capacitor impregnant or fusing device for use in alternating current capacitors, according to the government. The oil-based impregnant I currently used by the industry contains polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB), a substance that the Environmental Protection Agency has determined is a hazard to the environment. The Environmental Protection Agency recently proposed a ban on the discharge of all but very limited amounts of PCB; and Monsanto Co., the only present manufacturer of the oil-based impregnant, announced its intention to cease production of the product by the end of 1977, the Department explained. The parties represented that the project will be of limited duration and that other industry members will be permitted to join the venture upon their assump tion of an equal share of the total cost of the project. In addition, any patents resulting from the joint research will be made available to non-members of the venture on payment of an equal share of the total cost of the project. The six capacitor manufacturers account for approximately 45 percent of the $100 million annual sales of capacitors using impregnants containing PCB, the government said. U. S. SUPREME COURT Ruling Remand of state antitrust action to state court--non-reviewability . . . Slay of a district court order remanding to the Cali fornia state courts a state law antitrust action seeking damages on behalf of a pur ported class of automobile buyers was denied (by Mr. Justice Rehnquist), since the dis trict court's order was not subject to review. Whether or not the district court was cor rect in its conclusion that the case had been removed to federal court improvidently and without jurisdiction, remand to the state courts on those stated grounds cannot be reviewed (Volvo Corp. of America, U. S. Sup. Ct.fi 61,154). Left Standing Intervention in U. S. settlement . , . The National Farmers' Organization was denied review on November 8 of a decision that it could not intervene in the settlement of the government's antitrust case against a milk producers' group (National Fanners' Or ganisation, Dkt 76-238, fi60,021). Injunction-only attorney's fee . . . The contention that antitrust plaintiffs who won a monopolization injunction but not damages should be awarded a reasonable attorney's fee was not reviewed. The U. S. Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia had rejected the contention (1976-1 Trade Cases fi 60,880) prior to the recent amendment to the Clayton Act authorizing such awards (Alphin, Dkt 76-229, If 60,021). State's contract payment recovery plus treble damages . . . The Supreme Court re fused to consider the assertion that a Wis consin law allowing the state to recover contract payments where there was an anti trust violation was unconstitutional in light of the fact that the state antitrust law allowed recovery of treble damages. The 5 '! | i ij i i i i 3 i i 1 4t i i i t ' DSW283217 STLCOPCB4064546