EXHIBIT No. 646 [Letter from D. P. Hess, president, American Bosch Corporation, Springfield, Mass., to Leo Gottlieb, Root, Clark, Buckner & Ballantine, New York, dated June 2, 1941] Mr. LEO GOTTLIEB, JUNE 2, 1941. Root, Clark, Buckner & Ballantine, New York, N. Y. DEAR LEO: I have had an opportunity to go over the option and license agreements with the Dayton Liquid Meter Co. as forwarded with your letter of May 28. After rather careful study of these agreements I am convinced some major changes are necessary and I have asked Mr. Tyson to discuss this with Leon this afternoon. In the option agreement, at the top of page 2, we will have to cut out the payment of $1,000. We offered this to the Liquid Meter people and they flatly turned it down, so there is no use in offering it again. Paragraphs 2 and 3 will have to be completely revamped, as I am now satisfied we will positively need a multiple-cylinder unit to test before we can make our final decision. The present plan, as I understand it, is to supply us with a single-cylinder unit and with this unit we are expected to make our decision but based on our experiences, over the last 3 or 4 weeks, all of us here have definitely come to the conclusion that even if a single-cylinder unit does perform satisfactorily it does not necessarily follow that the multiplecylinder unit will do the job. Therefore, we should put in some phraseology along the line that Meter agrees to supply us with a multiple-cylinder unit after we have given tentative approval on the single-cylinder unit and that we will have an option for 6 months after receipt of the multiple-cylinder unit. Mr. Tyson will go over this in detail with you. On page 6, paragraph (b) seems awfully complicated. We all had to read it several times to get out of it the meaning you have implied, and I am wondering if you cannot simplify it to some extent. Paragraph 9 is out of the question and simply cannot be used. I fully realize what you and Leon have in mind, but under no circumstances would I want to have the impression created that Robert Bosch must approve our contractual relations in any shape or form. Please remember this crowd is very close to the Air Corps at Wright Field, Dayton, and if this information should get to these latter officials I would have more than a little trouble on my handsbecause I have been trying religiously to show the complete serverance between our two companies, and incidentally you and Leon do a swell job of setting up the closest kind of cooperation. This particular paragraph just cannot go into this agreement nor any other agreement that we may have to sign-and we will have to take our chances, if you feel this is necessary, on getting Robert Bosch's approval later on. With reference to the license agreement, page 5, section 7. We will have to revert back to the 5 percent royalty on sales. It is practically impossible to figure a royalty on aggregate cost of labor and materials because both of these items constantly vary, depending not only on the cost of labor and materials but also on the quantities produced. It is much simpler from a mechanical standpoint to use the 5 percent on sales, and I think we should do so. The important element in this license agreement as I see it is the matter of minimum royalty, and while Mr. Tyson will discuss this in detail with you I do not see how, under the circumstances of war conditions as they now exist and will exist, we can make any agreement as to when minimum royalties will start. For example, aeronautical engine design has been practically frozen until June 30, 1943, which means we could not hope to use any of these units on aeronautical engines until after this period. I think we should write in a clause to the effect that under present war conditions it is not possible to set up a time as to when minimum royalties will commence; but that in principle we agree to minimum royalties as follows: 5,000 the first year the pump is in actual production. Summarizing this situation we thing the agreements are very well drawn, and, as Leon has probably told you, I am very anxious to have a good look at this design because I have developed a real respect for the men who are back of it. They are going to be difficult to convince but I think it can be done, so I would appreciate your revamping these agreements as soon as possible and getting them back to me. Sincerely yours, cc. Messrs. Wild, Rosenthal, Tyson. D. P. HESS, President. EXHIBIT No. 647 [Letter from D. P. Hess, president, American Bosch Corporation, Springfield, Mass., to Dr. Walter Lippart, Robert Bosch G. m. b. H., Stuttgart, Germany, dated January 14, 1939] Dr. WALTER LIPPART, Robert Bosch G. m. b. H., Stuttgart, Germany. JANUARY 14, 1939. DEAR DR. LIPPART: Thank you very much for your nice letter of December 29, and we will be guided entirely by your suggestions contained therein. Mr. Behn and Mr. Wild are very anxious to see your lay-outs, as I was very enthusiastic about the design. You will probably be interested to know that I have just returned from the Middle West where I heard a great many stories about the difficulties that General Motors is having in the field with their two-cycle engines. We will keep you and Dr. Rassbach posted on these details as fast as they come to our attention. Very truly yours, DPH: fh. cc. Mr. Behn, Mr. Wild. President. [Handwritten:] Lay-outs rec'd w/ let dated Jan. 4 and turned over to J. E. Wild. EXHIBIT No. 648 [Letter from A. Zimmerman, American Bosch Corporation, Stuttgart, Germany, to D. P. Hess, president, American Bosch Corporation, Springfield, Mass., dated August 22, 1939] STUTTGART, August 22, 1939. DEAR MR. HESS: I arrived Sunday night, August 20, in Stuttgart and started my negotiations Monday morning with RB. Dr. Rassbach was still in Amsterdam on account of the Mendelssohn affair, of which I heard while on the boat as per attached clipping. Mendelssohn owes RB still a certain amount of money from the sale of their foreign holdings. Mr. Fellmeth, whom I know from my former activity in Stuttgart and Frankfurt, received me instead, and I submitted our case to him. Mr. Fellmeth, who has an excellent head, indeed, cross-examined me for about 2 hours about the whole Diesel business in the U. S. A., and as I was able to answer all his questions very thoroughly and apparently to his entire satisfaction he turned me over to Mr. Durst, whom I know very well, for further investigations, particularly in regard to our production times for pumps, nozzles, and nozzle holders. As you know from my last report to you in your office, I was perfectly prepared to go into details, and I must say that Mr. Durst gave me every possible assistance to bring light into the situation. Mr. Durst has been sitting together with me and his assistant, Mr. Hirsch, since yesterday morning, and we covered every detail in short order so completely that I am able to prepare now a full report to Mr. Fellmeth, which, of course, I shall submit first to Mr. Durst for his approval before passing it on to Mr. Fellmeth. Copy of this report will follow later. This morning Mr. Durst took me to the Oelerwerke (injection and lubricator production) in Feuerbach, where we cleared up further details with the assistance of Mr. Hirsch and the Feuerbach works manager, Mr. Schumacher, and his cost accountant, Mr. Schnell. All comparisons of our times with RB's proved very satisfactory, so that the facts have been established to convince RB that our production times are at least as good as RB's if compared with same or similar quantities as produced by RB in previous years. During the course of our investigation Mr. Schumacher mentioned that I came very well prepared for making the comparisons, and I wish to point out at this juncture that it was really due to our Mr. Eugen Durst's splendid cooperation in the last two weeks before my departure from Springfield. This afternoon, Mr. Durst had the kindness to show me around the Feurbach factories and new store houses which are all very impressive indeed. There is a tremendous activity here everywhere. Last Saturday I stopped in Berlin and visited during the morning the RB sales house there. The gentlemen were very, very nice, and Mr. Gmelin, the commercial manager, asked me to give you, Mr. Hess, and Mr. Wild his best regards. Trusting that my letter finds you in best of health, Mr. Hess, and with thanks to you and Mr. Wild, who have made possible this very splendid trip for me, I remain, Very sincerely yours, ALBERT ZIMMERMANN. EXHIBIT No. 649 [Memorandum by D. P. Hess, president, American Bosch Corporation, Springfield, Mass., dated June 19, 1941] AMERICAN BOSCH CORPORATION, MEMORANDUM Mr. E. C. Magdeburger, Bureau of Ships, Navy Department, Washington, D. C., just telephoned the writer stating that the Navy has decided to give an educational order to the Caterpillar Tractor Co., along the lines of building fuel injection equipment for the Navy, and asked our cooperation in this venture. It was explained to me that the Navy is extremely concerned over the fact that there is only one source of supply for a very large part of their fuel injection equipment and they feel it is absolutely vital that they put someone else in this business in view of the tremendously large naval building program now in contemplation and in progress. I questioned Mr. Magdeburger as to the specific things they want, and he only asked me to agree in principle that we would allow Caterpillar to use whatever patents we might have-for the period of the emergency-and to cooperate with Caterpillar in any way we could to help them become this second source of supply. The writer replied that we would do anything and everything the Navy asked us to do, but I would prefer that such request be made in writing, outlining specifically just what patents and other data Caterpillar required. Mr. Magdeburger agreed to do this in the very near future, but thanked me very muh for our willingness to help the Navy out in this matter. This question of Caterpillar supplying fuel injection equipment came up when the problem of establishing our new plant at Providence was discussed. ́It has since come up again along the line of Caterpillar supplying their own design fuel injection equipment for naval purposes It so happens in this latter regard that the Caterpillar design of fuel injection equipment would necessitate major changes by engine builders to replace our equipment, and of course this is not practicable under the present naval building program. Mr. Magdeburger did not go into definite detail, but it is my opinion that Caterpillar will copy our design and supply customers that we are now supplying and act throughout as a second source of supply. The fuel injection division of Caterpillar is located at San Leandro, Calif. As soon as we hear further from the Navy Department we will call a meeting of the board of directors and bring the matter up for further discussion. Copy mailed to all directors. D. P. HESS, President. cc. Messrs. Francis, Moll, Perry, Wild, Gottlieb (Root-Clark), Rosenthal. EXHIBIT No. 650 [Draft of a letter from D. P. Hess, president, American Bosch Corporation, Springfield, Mass., to Navy Department, Washington, D. C., dated July 1941] NAVY DEPARTMENT, Bureau of Ships, Washington, D. C. JULY - 1941. DEAR SIRS: Referring to the telephone conversation which Mr. E. C. Madgeburger, of the Bureau of Ships, had with Mr. Hess on June 19, 1941, and to the letter to us, dated June 28, 1941, from the Bureau, signed by Mr. John O. Huse, relating to the proposed manufacture of fuel injection equipment by Caterpillar Tractor Co., we are writing you to inform you more fully as to the status of the patents involved and the steps which it may be necessary to take to accomplish the objective which the Navy has in mind. At the outset we wish to confirm the statement made by Mr. Hess over the telephone that this corporation is willing and anxious to cooperate with the Navy in every way possible and intends to do so. The situation with reference to the patents in question is that such patents are owned by Robert Bosch G. m. b. H., of Stuttgart, Germany (hereinafter referred to as the Robert Bosch Co.) or its affiliated companies. American Bosch Corporation has a license under all of the United States patents of the Robert Bosch Co. and its affiliated companies. Such license is exclusive, except as against the licensor, and is indivisible, i. e., American Bosch Corporation has no right to grant sublicenses. Prior to April 1, 1941, American Bosch Corporation was under contract to pay royalties to the Robert Bosch Co. for the rights granted to it by the Robert Bosch Co. in connection with the manufacture of fuel-injection equipment. Thereafter, however, American Bosch Corporation made an arrangement with the Robert Bosch Co., effective as of April 1, 1941, whereby for a lump-sum payment, the Robert Bosch Co. agreed to waive all royalties for a period terminating with the conclusion of peace between Germany and Great Britain, and also between Germany and any country of the Western Hemisphere with which Germany might in the meantime be at war, the period of the waiver in no event to be less than 2 years, and whereby the Robert Bosch Co. further agreed that, during the same period, the contracts between American Bosch Corporation and the Robert Bosch Co. should be suspended, and their termination date extended by an equal period. Before the proposal resulting in this arrangement was made by American Bosch Corporation to the Robert Bosch Co., the United States State Department was advised of the intention of American Bosch Corporation to make such proposal, in order to give the State Department an opportunity to interpose objections thereto if it desired to do so. No objections were interposed and the proposal was made and accepted. Thus, American Bosch Corporation is not currently paying any royalties to the Robert Bosch Co. for its general license under all United States patents of the Robert Bosch Co. and its affiliated companies. American Bosch Corporation is entirely willing to modify the exclusive nature of its present rights under these patents to the extent of permitting the Caterpillar Tractor Co. to manufacture fuel injection equipment for the United States Navy during the period of the emergency. However, since this corporation's rights are indivisible, the consent of the Robert Bosch Co. is also required to confer the desired rights on Caterpillar Tractor Co. Our suggestion would be that American Bosch Corporation be requested by Caterpillar Tractor Co. to ask the Robert Bosch Co. to give its required consent. At the same time, American Bosch Corporation would advise the Robert Bosch Co. of its willingness to have such rights conferred upon the Caterpillar Tractor Co. We cannot, of course, predict what would be the response of the Robert Bosch Co. but we are prepared to urge, with all earnestness, compliance with this request. If the Robert Bosch Co. should decline to give the requested consent, it might possibly accomplish the Navy's objective for the Navy to place with American Bosch Corporation the orders in question, and then have American Bosch Corporation subcontract them to Caterpillar Tractor Co. American Bosch Corporation would be glad to cooperate in this way, if this meets with the Navy's wishes. 84949-44-pt. 16- -30 Another possible alternative would be for the Navy to decide to have Caterpillar Tractor Co. use the patents without obtaining the consent of the Robert Bosch Co. In that case, American Bosch Corporation would be prepared to give its own consent, for whatever legal effect such consent might have. However, it would seem reasonable, in such event, that American Bosch Corporation should receive an undertaking to indemnify it against any possible liability to the Robert Bosch Co. by reason of American Bosch Corporation having cooperated in such action. In addition to the matter of patent rights, it will probably be necessary for this Corporation to furnish additional cooperation to Caterpillar Tractor Co. by way of supplying it with designs, drawings, specifications, and technical data of various kinds. If the Robert Bosch Co. gives its consent to the conferring upon Caterpillar Tractor Co. of the necessary patent rights, this can be so worded as to eliminate any question as to the right of American Bosch Corporation to supply technical data which may have originated with the Robert Bosch Co. Even without such consent, American Bosch Corporation would still be prepared to supply such data to the Caterpillar Tractor Co., but in such event, again, it would seem reasonable that American Bosch Corporation should receive an undertaking to indemnify it against any possible liability to the Robert Bosch Co. for so doing. It should be understood that this letter refers only to United States patents of which American Bosch Corporation is the owner or licensee, and that American Bosch Corporation cannot give Caterpillar Tractor Co. any protection against patent rights of third parties. Caterpillar Tractor Co. will have to satisfy itself as to its position with reference to any such patent rights. If there is any further information you would like to have with reference to this matter, please let us know and we shall endeavor to furnish it. We assume that in due course we shall hear from you as to whether you wish us to proceed to attempt to obtain from the Robert Bosch Co. its consent to the conferring upon the Caterpillar Tractor Co. of the proposed patent rights and to the furnishing of technical data, etc., to such company. Very truly yours, MY DEAR SENATOR KILGORE: Enclosed are copies of the Report on the Administration and Control of Rohm & Haas Co. by the Alien Property Custodian, 1917– 20, and Report on the Development of the Bosch Magneto Co., 1906-30, as Related to the Activities of the Office of the Alien Property Custodian. These are the reports which you requested us to prepare for you. Very truly yours, GERALD J. DAVIS, Chief, Division of Justice Department Archives. EXHIBIT No. 652 REPORT ON THE ADMINISTRATION AND CONTROL OF ROHM & HAAS CO. BY THE ALIEN PROPERTY CUSTODIAN, 1917-201 Rohm & Haas Co. was the offspring of a German partnership formed between Otto Rohm and Otto Haas, citizens of Germany, under contract executed at the city of Stuttgart, Germany, dated August 30, 1907. The business of the partnership at first was conducted at Esslingen, but in 1900 was removed to Darmstadt, This report is based exclusively on records in The National Archives created or ac cumulated by the Office of the Alien Property Custodian during and immediately after World War I. |