Announced Actions for May 21, 2002

As explained in the notice, which will be published shortly, the Commission is requesting public comment on Dow Chemical Company's (Dow's) petition to establish a new generic fiber subclass name and definition for its new cross-linked elastic fiber called "CEF." The company filed its request pursuant to Rule 8 of the FTC's Rules and Regulations Under the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act (Textile Rules), 16 C.F.R. Sec. 303.8.

Pursuant to the petition, the Commission will consider whether to amend Rule 7 of the Textile Rules to include a description of the new fiber and, if so, how to implement the change. Dow has petitioned the FTC to establish the generic name "lastol" as an alternative to, and subclass of, the current generic category "olefin." The Commission also has granted Dow a temporary alphanumeric designation, "DCC 0001," for use in marketing CEF. The temporary designation will remain in place until the Commission makes a final determination on Dow's petition.

Comments as to whether the Commission should amend the Textile Rules, as requested by Dow, will be accepted until August 12, 2002. Comments should be submitted to: Office of the Secretary, Federal Trade Commission, Room 159, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580. They should be identified as "16 CFR Part 303 - Textile Rule 8 Dow Comment - P948404." The Commission vote to grant Dow a temporary designation for CEF and publish the Federal Register notice was 5-0. (File No. P948404; staff contact is Neil J. Blickman, Bureau of Consumer Protection, 202-326-3038.)

Denial of defendants' motion in Libbey Inc., et al:

In an order issued May 20, 2002, U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton denied the defendants' motion to vacate the preliminary injunction blocking Libbey, Inc.'s (Libbey) proposed $332 million acquisition of Anchor Hocking (Anchor), a wholly owned subsidiary of Newell Rubbermaid, Inc. Judge Walton rejected the defendants' arguments that recent changes to the acquisition agreement between Libbey and Anchor eliminated the need for a preliminary injunction. Judge Walton wrote that "the Court concludes that the changes made by defendants do not amount to a change in circumstances that are sufficient to obviate the need for the preliminary injunction entered on April 22, 2002." (Staff contact is Richard Liebeskind, Bureau of Competition, 202-326-2441; FTC File No.: 011-0194; see press release dated April 23, 2002.)

Copies of the documents mentioned in this release are available from the FTC's Web site at http://www.ftc.gov and also from the FTC's Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580. Call toll-free: 1-877-FTC-HELP.