Jurors had on Thursday sent a string of questions to the judge after failing to reach a unanimous decision on the US accountancy firm's guilt or innocence in eight days of deliberations.
The queries revolved around whether jurors could disagree over the identity of any guilty individuals but still convict the accountancy firm as a whole.
Andersen, which audited the accounts of collapsed energy giant Enron, was put on trial after allegations that employees illegally destroyed thousands of documents and computer records relating to their scandal-hit client.
If convicted, Andersen would face fines but, more importantly, could also be barred from auditing publicly traded companies - something that would effectively put the US arm of one of the world's top five accountants out of business.
Disagreement
In Thursday's note to trial judge Melinda Harmon, the jurors asked: "If each of us believes that one Andersen agent acted knowingly and with corrupt intent, is it for all of us to believe it was the same agent?
"Can one believe it was agent A, another believe it was agent B, and another believe it was agent C?"
Judge Harmon, sitting in Houston, said she wanted to review more case law before instructing the jury how to proceed.
Lawyers for the government and Andersen disagreed over the answer.
"As long as they agree on the bottom line, it isn't necessary for them to agree on the same actor," said assistant attorney general Andrew Weissman.
Andersen lawyers argued jurors needed to be unanimous on the guilt of one person before they could convict the firm.
~RS~a~RS~International~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~08~RS~)