Scott Paper Comp a

Text (OCR of the scan; may contain errors)

SCOTT PAPER COMP A

Docket 6559. Ordel, Feb. 21, 1961 Order, with memorandum, denying motion requesting 60-day stay and recon. sidcration of divestiture order of Dec. 16, 1960, 57 F. C. 1415. The rcspondcnt, on January 16, 1961, filed a motion reqncsting that the order conta,ined in the Commission's decision entered De. cember 16, 1960, be stayed for sixty days; that the respondent be orally heard on the motion; and that the order be reconsidered by the Commission. In support or the motion, respondent contends among other things, that the requirement in the order ror divestiture is unnecessarily harsh; that respondent has had no opportunity to present its views as to the provisions 01 the order; and that the order is unenforceable because or lack or specificity. 'Vhen rendering its decision in this proceeding, the Commission determined that divestiture or the assets or the named corporations acquired and thereafter held by the respondent in violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Act, as amended, was the appropriate remedy for correcting those violations. In directing such divestiture, the order also prescribes guideposts ror its conduct in good raith, in. dueling restoration of the acquired properties as competitive entities in substantially the same operating form and of substa,ntia,Hy equi'7 of acqni-alent productive capacity.y as existed at or about the time sition; and the ordcr additionally directs the respondent to submit within sixty days a plan for compliance with the order, with time for compliance to be iixed thereafter. The challenged order accordingly contemplates full opportunity for t.he respondent to submit in writ.ing its recommendations and suggestions relating to the order requirements ror good faith divestiture of the acquired assets, with opportunity.y for counsel supporting the complaint to respond in writing. Furthermore, it is implicit in the Commission's prior action that an ac1ditiona.1 order specifying the ma.nner or divestiturc within the purview of Section 11 of the aforesaid Act, as weJJ as the time within which it must be accomplished, will fonow.

ORDER

It .;s ordered That the respondent's motion be, and it hereby is denied.

It is further orde?wl However, that the time within which the respondent may submit its plan for compliance with the order for diwstiture be, and it hereby is, extended to include thirt.y (30) days rrom the service upon the r€'spondent of this order. Commissioner lills not participating.