Case Information
*1 The Attorney General of Texas January 15. 1982
MARK WHITE
Attorney General Robert Bernstein, M.D. Open Records Decision No. 303
supreme court SulldlnQ Coolmissioner of Health P. 0. Boa 12545 Texas Department of Eealth Re: Whether details o.f the AUstkl. TX. 75n1 1100 West 49th Streht manufacture of medication 512l475.2591 should be vithheld ~from dis- Telex @lw74-lS7 Austin, Texas 70756 TV 512l475.0255 closure under the Open Records
Act
,597 Mskl St.. suit* 1400 Dear Dr. Bernstein: osnu. TX. 75201 2t4n42-5244
You have requested our decision under the Open Records Act, article 6252-17a, V.T.C.S.. as to whether details regarding the Albelts Ave., sune 150 manufacture of a certain medication are available to the public. sa.Tx. 79905 x%354 Ortho-Tex of San Antonio, the manufacturer of chemolase, a lumbar disc disease, proteolytic enzyme used in the treatment of OaJlea Ave. suulte 202 to the Texas Department of Health to recently submitted an application Howtml.Tx. 77m manufacture, sell and distribute chemolase in the state of Texas. A 71- competitor has requested a copy of that portion of the application the details of the method of manufacturing chemolase. which provides m5 snmdwey. @Ate 312 You suggest that this information is excepted from disclosure under Lubbock. TX. 79401 of the Open Records Act as: section 3(s)(lO) 5mf747a235 trade secrets and commercial or financial uo9 N. Tenth. Suite 5 information obtained from a person and privileged McAlbn,Tx. 18501 or confidential by stetute or judicial decision. 512a524547 The section 3(e)(lO) exception is patterned after an almost in the federal Freedom of Informetion Act. which identical provision 200 MM PIUS. suite 400 exempts “trade secrets and connnercial or San Antonio, TX. 75203 financial information 5%?l22s419~ obtained from any person and privileged or confidential.” 5 U.S.C.
$552(b) (4). When the legislature adopts language from another jurisdiction, is presumed to have intended it to have the same it An Equel OPPWtUWl meaning. State v. Weiss, 171 S.W.Zd 848. 851 (Tex. 1943). The Atfinnatiw Action Emrdow legislative history of the federal provision makes it clear that
manufacturing ,processes were intended to be included within this exception. The House Report accompanying the legislation notes that the exception:
. ..uempts such material if it would not customarily be made public by the person from whom *2 .
Dr. Robert Bernstein - Page 2 . The l xexption
it ves obtained by the Government. would business sales statistics, include lists, scientific or inventories, customsr manufacturing processes or developments, and negotiation positions or requirements in the case of labor-management mediations. (Emphasis added).
House Report No. 1497. 89th Cong.. 2d Sess. 10 (1966). U.S. Code Cong.
h Adm. Naws 2148, 2427. See Open Records Decision Nos. 255 (1980); - 107 (1975).
Since a manufacturing process is clearly within the meaning of "trade secret," and since the applicant, Ortho-Tex. regards the information es a "trade secret," we are of the opinion that the details of the method of manufacturing chemolase are excepted from disclosure under section 3(a)(lO) of the Open Records Act.
-&-gy&g
Attorney General of Texas JOliR W. FAINTER, JR.
First Assistant Attorney General
RKRARD E. GRAT XXI
Executive Assistant Attorney General
Prepared by Rick Gilpin
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
Susan L. Garrison, Chairman
Walter Davis
Rick Gilpin
Jim Moellinger