The opinion of the court was delivered by: HIGGINBOTHAM
Plaintiff, United States of America, having filed its complaint herein on December 24, 1964, settlement of the case as to all defendants except FMC Corporation having been made, the case as to FMC Corporation having been brought on for trial on January 3, 1968, and the Court having rendered its Opinion, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on August 22, 1969; and the parties having submitted proposed decrees and having submitted briefs and oral argument as to the form of the decree,
Now, Therefore, it is Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed as follows:
This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter herein and the two parties hereto. Defendant FMC has engaged in a continuing agreement, understanding and concert of action with others to eliminate price competition in the sale of liquid caustic soda in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act.
While the proven violations as noted in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law were limited to liquid caustic soda, there is such an interrelationship in the manufacture and marketing of chlor-alkali products that the public interest can be adequately protected only by issuing a broader decree which includes all of the chlor-alkali products, and thus not a decree which is limited solely to liquid caustic soda.
As used in this Final Judgment:
(A) "Defendant" shall mean FMC Corporation, organized under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business in San Jose, California;
(B) "Person" shall mean any individual, partnership, firm, corporation, association, or other business or legal entity;
(C) "Chlor-alkali products" shall mean all forms of chlorine, caustic soda and soda ash, as such, or any of them; and
(D) "Manufacturer" shall mean a person who, within the United States, produces chlor-alkali products and regularly solicits ...