Boise Cascade Corporation

Volume 89 · 89 F.T.C. 90

Citation: 89 F.T.C. 90
Docket: 8958
Decision: 1977-01-14
Document type: interlocutory order
Case type: antitrust
Outcome: other
Commission counsel: James C. Egan, Jr" Robert J. Enders and Roger L. Leifer,
Respondent counsel: Robert T Johnson, Bell, Boyd, Lloyd, Haddad & Burns, Chicago, Il. John K. Mallory, Jr.. Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton, Washington, D. C., Frank Brewer, Portland, Ore., George J. Wade, Sherman Sterling, New York City, Edwin S. Rockefeller, Bierbower Rockefeller, Washington, D. Franc ' A. Kareken, Tacoma, Wash. Norman J. Wiener, Miller, Anderson, Nash. Yerke & and Joseph A.Wiener Portland, Ore. Edward T Tate, Lee A. Rau McClay, Washington, D.C. andRieser, Jr" Reed, Smith, Shaw Hammond E. Chaffetz, Kirkland Ellis, Chicago, Ill
Source: Original volume PDF
Original PDF: This decision as a PDF

Cite this decision

Boise Cascade Corporation, 89 F.T.C. 90 (1977). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v089-0009

Report an error in this record (decision id v089-0009)

Order status: unknown. Sunset may be extended by the latest qualifying federal-court complaint alleging an order violation; complaints, dismissal/appeal outcomes, and respondent-specific extensions are not fully tracked.

Cited by 0 later FTC decisions

Cites

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IN THE MA1TER OF BOISE CASCADE CORPORATION ET AL.

Doket 8958. Interlocutory Order. Jan. 14. /,977 Commission declines to entertain motion for reconsideration by the full Commission of orders of Dec. 23, 1976, and Jan. 3 , 1977, regarding extensions of time. Appearances For the Commission: James C. Egan, Jr" Robert J. Enders and Roger L. Leifer, For the respondents: Robert T Johnson, Bell, Boyd, Lloyd, Haddad & Burns, Chicago, Il. John K. Mallory, Jr.. Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton, Washington, D. C., Frank Brewer, Portland, Ore., George J. Wade, Sherman Sterling, New York City, Edwin S. Rockefeller, Bierbower Rockefeller, Washington, D. Franc ' A. Kareken, Tacoma, Wash. Norman J. Wiener, Miller, Anderson, Nash. Yerke & and Joseph A.Wiener Portland, Ore. Edward T Tate, Lee A. Rau McClay, Washington, D.C. andRieser, Jr" Reed, Smith, Shaw Hammond E. Chaffetz, Kirkland Ellis, Chicago, Ill. ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION On December 23, 1976, the Commission issued an order denying as unwarranted a motion filed by all respondents for a 60-day extension of time in which to fie their appeal briefs from the initial decision and, instead, granting respondents 45 days after service of the initial decision in which to fie. On January 3, 1977, the Commission rejected a separate request fied by respondent WiJamette Industries, Inc., for, a 60,day extension.

Respondent Wilamette now moves that the Commission reconsid, er its January 3, 1977, order. Respondent renews and expands upon its claim that new counsel, retained to represent it on the appeal require more time in which to familiarize themselves with the record. It is determined that no reasons have been presented to warrant a modification of the original orders. Because this determination is properly issued in the name of the Commission pursuant to the delegation of functions published at 27 F. R. 481 (Jan. 17 , 1962), the Commission declines to entertain the motion for reconsideration by :he full Commission.

Et is so ordered.

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP.

Complaint

← 89 F.T.C. 82 · 89 F.T.C. 91 →