Citation Codes Equivalent Citations citation codes Docket Number Nos. 16908-16914. Attorney(S) Philip Wilens, Head, Statutory Enforcement Unit, Criminal Division, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., Drew J.T. O'Keefe, U.S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant. Charles Ruff, Robert Gary, Attys., Dept. of Justice, John W. Coggins, Director, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Legal Division, Office of Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, D.C., of counsel. James H. McGlothlin, Washington, D.C. Pepper, Hamilton Scheetz, Philadelphia, Pa., Richard A. Brady, William A. Dobrovir, Covington Burling, Washington, D.C., Philip H. Strubing, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee Hiram Walker Incorporated. H. Francis DeLone, Richard G. Schneider, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee-witnesses: Sullivan, Deimeyer, Curran, Letizia, Wheatley, DeWilde. Russell E. Ellis, Norristown, Pa., for appellee-witness: Mortensen. Judges Harry Ellis Kalodner Abraham Lincoln Freedman Francis Lund Van Dusen Acts Intoxicating Liquors — Federal Alcohol Administration Act — Federal Alcohol Administration — Short Title See more information ... Smart Summary Please sign up to generate summary. Harold A. SERR, Director Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Di v. sion Internal Re OPINION OF THE COURT PER CURIAM. Is the Director of the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division, Internal Revenue Service, empowered by the Federal Alcohol Administration Act, 27 U.S.C.A. § 201 et seq., to conduct a special investigation of a permittee of the Division with the power to compel witnesses to appear and testify? The District Court answered the question in the negative in the instant case in denying the Director's petitions for enforcement of his subpoenas duces tecum directed to the appellees in the course of his investigation of the Division's permittee, Hiram Walker Incorporated. We are of the view that the District Court did not err in holding that the Federal Alcohol Administration Act did not in § 2(g), or any other section, expressly or impliedly empower the Director of the Alcohol and Tobacco Division to conduct special investigation of the Division's permittees and to issue subpoenas duces tecum pursuant thereto. The District Court's Order denying the petitions to enforce the Director's subpoenas will be affirmed for the reasons so well stated in Judge John W. Lord's excellent opinion reported at 270 F. Supp. 544 (E.D.Pa. 1967).