U. S. V. IBM (69 CIV. 200 S.D.N.Y.)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP78-01092A000100050025-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 6, 2002
• Sequence Number: 25
• Publication Date: April 13, 1972
• Content Type: MFR

Approved For Rel
-' /a81Q6 CZA=R
OQ0050025-8
13 April 1972
SUBJECT: U. S. v. IBM (69 Civ. 200 S.D. N. Y. )
1. On 11 April 1972, I attended a meeting in the offices of
the DOD General Counsel. Its purpose was to discuss the impact
that the disclosure requirements of Pretrial Orders No. 2 and 3
would have on the National Security Agency and this Agency.
Present were:
Fred Buzhardt, DOD/General Counsel
Leonard Niederlehner, DOD/Deputy General Counsel
Calvin Vos, DOD/OGC
Raymond Carlson, Justice /Antitrust Division, Trial
Attorney
Grant Moy, Justice /Antitrust Division
2. At the outset, Buzhardt set the atmosphere that was to
prevail throughout the course of the 2 1/2 hour session. He said
the Government would be better off to lose this antitrust suit rather
than to have the files of its intelligence agencies made subject to the
indiscriminate search contemplated by the orders. We gave little
credence to the suggestion that protective measures could be devised
that would adequately safeguard the information to be found. As
evidence of some of the problems involved here and their magnitude,
I said that under no circumstances would parties assisting in this
litigation be granted access to our files except on the basis of a STATINTL
national agency check or a full field investigation. I told Carlson
Approved For Release 20 , /Q . d 0P78.D1O92 100050025-8
 Approved For Release 2002/01,A6';
RIA.-RPF'7&-QJ AQQ 0050025-8
OGC
3. For the edification of Carlson and Moy, they were givqliATINTL
a general briefing on the sensitivity of the intelligence function as
it relates to the interests of national defense.
4. In response to Carlson's statement that access to classified
documents would be granted only to parties having the appropriate
clearances, Buzhardt countered by saying the files of the intelligence
agencies could only be made available to cleared parties having a need
to know in the interest of national security. In his view, access for
purposes of this litigation would not meet that requirement. He then
stated that NSA could not comply with Orders No. 2 and 3. He asked
that Justice take appropriate action to have it exempted. I stated that
the position of this Agency was in all respects identical to that of NSA
and that we would require the same consideration. While evidencing
some misgivings in anticipation of the Court's reaction to this develop-
ment, Carlson agreed to make an appropriate oral representation to
the Court at the hearings scheduled for 10:00 a.m., Friday, April 14.
He stated, however, that he would first make our positions known to
Mr. Comegys (Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division) and
possibly, Mr. Kleindienst. We invited this.
5. It was tentatively agreed that at the April 14 hearing,
Carlson is to propose that NSA and CIA be dropped from the pro-
ceedings. He is to ask the Court to set a date, not earlier than
May 15, for hearing argument which is to be supported by affidavits
filed by NSA and this Agency. Buzhardt said that NSA's Director
would submit its affidavit. I said that ours would probably be
executed by our General Counsel. For guidance in matters of
procedure, Carlson is to consult with Kevin Maroney of Justice's
Internal Security Division. We identified Maroney as having had
some experience in arguing issues of the type that would be involved
here.
6. On 14 April, Justice will move for a protective order con-
cerning access to, and the handling of, classified materials and pro-
prietary data. We had taken exception to the order as drafted by
Justice. They agreed that it should be made more restrictive. In
support of the motion to be made, Buzhardt is to file an affidavit on
behalf of DOD.
Approved For Release 2002/6 jCIA-RDP78-0092A000050025-8
 Approved For Rele,e 20 (6~aLJ17p90050025-8
7. In our subsequent conversation, Buzhardt suggested that
we coordinate our efforts to have NSA and this Agency disengaged
from this suit. For the present, however, Justice is on notice that
we intend to resist becoming involved.
OGC:RJB:bg
Distribution:
,, rig - Subject - LITIGATION, CIVIL
1 - RJB Signer
1 - Chrono
1 - O/PPB
1 - DD/S&
1 - ExDir - ompt
STATINTL
Approved For Release 20Q2/08106 ClA-R[ Pf8-010 F 100050025-8
it s a sd't U.?. C: 3 71
 rove~ls~eaRe{e081~t ~~fR"P?~9tA~9 0050
Ap 25-8
UNCLASSIFIED CO FIDENTIAL SECRET
Ap
OFFICIAL ROUTING SLIP
TO
NAME AND ADDRESS
DATE
INITIALS
1
Executive irecto
2
3
4
5
6
ACTION
DIRECT REP Y
PREPARE REPLY
APPROVAL
DISPATCH
RECOMMENDATION
COMMENT
FILE
RETURN
CONCURRENCE
INFORMATIO
SIGNATURE
Remarks :
Bill: We cannot say w t the outcome
will be, but I thought you sh uld know
the line we are taking wi efense in
the IBM case.
Lawrence R. Houston
FOLD HERE TO RETURN TO SENDER
FROM: NAME. ADDRESS AND PHONE NO.
ATE
General Counsel
~
UNCLASSIFIED CONFIDENTIAL
- I
- --
SECRET
STATINTL
STATINTL
FORM NO. 237 Use previous editions (40)
1-67 I