Applied Antitrust Law

Dale Collins
NYU School of Law
Georgetown University Law Center

NB: "±" indicates that the hyperlink will take you to another site.

 

Home page
Topical index
Case studies index

11. Horizontal Mergers

 

13. Merger Review

 

 

12. Nonhorizontal Mergers

 

Reading and class notes
Significant precedents
Elimination of potential competition
Vertical foreclosure
Vertical information conduits
Conglomerate theories
Director and management interlocks
Reference materials
Case studies

 
Primary Materials
Supplemental Materials

Reading and Class Notes

Reading and class notes

Unit 12 reading

Unit 12 class notes

 

Significant Precedents

 

United States v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 353 U.S. 586 (1957) (± Oyez)

Discussed in Unit 9

 

United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., 376 U.S. 651 (1964) (± Oyez)

Federal Power Commission

In re Northwest Natural Gas Co., 13 F.P.C. 221 (June 18, 1954) (authorizing Pacific Northwest Pipeline Corporation to construct and operate a natural gas pipeline from the San Juan Basin to Washington and Oregon)

In re Pacific Northwest Pipeline Corp., 22 F.P.C. 1091 (Dec. 23, 1959) (authorizing El Paso Natural Gas Company to acquire and operate the facilities of Pacific Northwest Pipeline Corporation by a merger of the two corporations), aff'd, California v. FPC, 296 F.2d 348 (D.C. Cir. 1961), rev'd, 369 U.S. 482 (1962) (± Oyez)

In re Pacific Northwest Pipeline Corp., 28 F.P.C. 7 (July 2, 1962) (No. G-13018) (issuing El Paso a temporary certificate to operate the facilities of its Pacific Northwest Division pending the final resolution of the Department of Justice's antitrust challenge)

District court

Complaint, United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., No. 143-57 (D. Utah filed July 22, 1957) (Blue Book No. 1354)

United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., No. 143-57 (D. Utah Nov. 20, 1962) (finding no violation of Section 7) (reported at 1962 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 70,571)

Supreme Court

rev'd, United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., 376 U.S. 651 (1964)

On remand

United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., No. 143-57 (D. Utah June 24, 1965) (reported at 1965 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 71,453)

Supreme Court

rev'd sub nom. Cascade Natural Gas Co. v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., 386 US 129 (Feb. 27, 1967) (± Oyez)

On remand

United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., No. 143-57 (D. Utah Aug. 29, 1968) (as amended) (reported at 291 F. Supp. 3)

Supreme Court

vacated sub nom. Utah Public Serv. Comm'n v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., 395 U.S. 464 (June 16, 1969)

On remand

United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., 1972 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 73,975 (D. Colo. June 25, 1971) (as amended July 26, 1971)

United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., 358 F. Supp. 820 (D. Colo. June 16, 1972) (updated Aug. 30, 1972)

United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., 1972 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 74,135 (D. Colo. Aug. 2, 1972)

United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., 1972 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 74,148 (D. Colo. Aug. 30, 1972)

Supreme Court

aff'd mem., El Paso Natural Gas Co. v. United States, 410 U.S. 962 (1973)

District court

United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., Civ. A. No. C-2626, 1975 WL 1026 (D. Colo. Jan. 3, 1975) (modifying decree)

 

United States v. Penn-Olin Chemical Co., 378 U.S. 158 (1964) (± Oyez)

District court

Complaint, United States. v. Penn-Olin Chemical Co., Civ. No. 2282 (D. Del. filed Jan. 6, 1961) (Blue Book No. 1583) (as in the case file)

Docket sheet (as copied by NARA)

Opinion, United States. v. Penn-Olin Chemical Co., Civ. No. 2282 (D. Del. May 1, 1963) (reported at 217 F. Supp. 110)

Judgment (May 15, 1963)

Supreme Court

vacated, United States v. Penn-Olin Chemical Co., 378 U.S. 158 (1964)

On remand

Opinion following Remand, United States v. Penn-Olin Chemical Co., Civ. No. 2282  (D. Del. Oct 12, 1965) (reported at 246 F. Supp. 917)

Supreme Court

Brief for the Untied States (Oct. 9, 1967)

Brief for Appellees (Nov. 17, 1967)

Reply Brief by the United States (Dec. 5, 1967)

aff'd by an equally divided Court, United States v. Penn-Olin Co., 389 U.S. 308 (Dec. 11, 1967)

 

FTC v. Procter & Gamble Co., 386 U.S. 568 (1967) (± Oyez)

FTC

Complaint, In re Procter & Gamble Co., 63 F.T.C. 1465 (filed Sept. 30, 1957) (No. 6901)

Opinion and order (June 15, 1961) (remanding cause to hearing examiner)

Second Initial Decision, In re Procter & Gamble Co., 63 F.T.C. 1465, 1477 (Feb. 28, 1962)

Opinion, In re Procter & Gamble Co., 63 F.T.C. 1465, 1534  ( Nov. 26, 1963) (No. 6901)

Sixth Circuit

Procter & Gamble Co. v. FTC, 358 F.2d 74 (6th Cir. Mar. 18, 1966) (No. 15769)

Supreme Court

Brief for the Federal Trade Commission (Dec. 1, 1966)

Brief for the Respondent (Jan. 10, 1967)

Reply Brief for the Federal Trade Commission (Feb. 1, 1967)

rev'd and remanded, FTC v. Procter & Gamble Co., 386 U.S. 568 (1967)

 

Ford Motor Co. v. United States, 405 U.S. 562 (1972) (Autolite) (± Oyez)

District Court

Complaint, United States v. Ford Motor Co., Civ. No. 21911 (E.D. Mich. filed Nov. 27, 1961) (Blue Book No. 1634)

United States v. Ford Motor Co., 286 F. Supp. 407 (E.D. Mich. June 7, 1968) 

supplemented, United States v. Ford Motor Co., 315 F. Supp. 372  (E.D. Mich. July 7, 1970)

Final Judgment (Dec. 18, 1970)

Supreme Court

aff'd, Ford Motor Co. v. United States, 405 U.S. 562 (Mar. 29, 1972) (Autolite)

District Court

Modification of final Judgment (Jan. __, 1974)

 

United States v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 410 U.S. 526 (1973)

District court

Complaint, United States v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., Civ. No. 3523 (D.R.I. filed July 13, 1965) (Blue Book No. 1859)

United States v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 332 F. Supp. 970 (D.R.I. Feb. 28, 1971) (finding that the transaction did not violate the Clayton Act)

Supreme Court

Brief for the United States (June 8, 1972)

Brief for Falstaff Brewing Corporation (July 10, 1972)

Reply Brief for the United States (Oct. 1, 1972)

rev'd, United States v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 410 U.S. 526 (1973)

On remand

United States v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 383 F. Supp. 1020 (D.R.I. Oct 23, 1974) (Civ. No. 3523)

 

United States v. Marine Bancorporation, Inc., 418 U.S. 602 (1974) (± Oyez)

Comptroller of the Currency

Annual Report 1971 (summary of the decision approving the merger begins on page 138)

District court

Complaint, United States v. Marine Bancorporation, Civ. A. No. 237-71C2 (W.D. Wash. filed Oct. 22, 1971) (Blue Book No. 2195)

United States v. Marine Bancorporation, Civ. A. No. 237-71C2 , 1973-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 74,496 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 31, 1973) (finding that the transaction did not violate the Clayton Act)

Supreme Court

Transcript of Record (Index)

Brief for the United States (Dec. 29, 1973)

Answering Brief of Appellees (Feb. 27, 1974)

Brief for the Comptroller of the Currency (Apr. 8, 1974)

Reply Brief for the United States (Apr. 19, 1974)

aff'd, United States v. Marine Bancorporation, Inc., 418 U.S. 602 (1974)

Elimination of Potential Competition

Nielsen/Arbitron

Seminal cases
 

United States v. Marine Bancorporation, Inc., 418 U.S. 602 (1974) (± Oyez)

United States v. Penn-Olin Chemical Co., 378 U.S. 158 (1964) (± Oyez)

Nielsen/Arbitron
(FTC 2013)

 

 
—Acquisition

± Nielsen N.V., Press Release, Nielsen to Acquire Arbitron (Dec. 18, 2012)

± Investor Presentation (Dec. 18, 2012)

± Execution Version Agreement and Plan of Merger among Nielsen Holdings N.V., TNC Sub I Corporation and Arbitron Inc. (dated as of Dec. 17, 2012)

—Complaint

Complaint, In re Nielsen Holdings N.V., No. C-4439 (FTC accepted for public comment Sept. 20, 2013) (± FTC news release)

± FTC web page

—Consent settlement

Decision and Order (Sept. 20, 2013) (Redacted Public Version)

Statement of the Commission (Sept. 20, 2013)
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Wright (Sept. 20, 2013)

 

Agreement Containing Consent Order (Sept. 20, 2013)

Monitor Agreement (Sept. 20, 2013) (Redacted Public Version)
Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order To Aid Public Comment (Sept. 20, 2013)

Federal Register notice (Sept. 27, 2013)

Application for Approval of Divestiture of Linkmeter Assets and Related Agreements (Jan. 17, 2014) (FTC news release—issued Jan. 24, 2014)

Complaint, In re Nielsen Holdings N.V., No. C-4439 (FTC issued Feb. 24, 2014) (FTC news release)

Decision and Order (Feb. 24, 2014)

Letter to Commenter Yinger (Feb. 24, 2014)

Commission Letter Approving Application Filed by Nielsen Holdings N.V. For Approval of Divestiture of Linkmeter Assets and Related Agreements to comScore Inc. (Mar. 31, 2014)

 

 

Significant lower court precedents
 

± Tenneco, Inc. v. FTC, 689 F.2d 346 (2d Cir. 1982)

± United States v. Siemens Corp., 621 F.2d 499 (2d Cir. 1980)

± BOC Int’l, Ltd. v. FTC, 557 F.2d 24 (2d Cir. 1977)

± FTC v. Atl. Richfield Co., 549 F.2d 289 (4th Cir. 1977)

In re Brunswick Corp., 94 F.T.C. 1174 (1979), aff'd in part & mod. in part sub nom. Yamaha Corp. v. FTC, 657 F.2d 971 (8th Cir. 1981).

Enforcement policy
 

± J. Thomas Rosch & Darren S. Tucker, Emerging Theories of Competitive Harm in Merger Enforcement, Antitrust Source, Oct. 2011.

± M . Sean Royall & Adam DiVencenzo, Evaluating Mergers Between Potential Competitors Under the New Horizontal Merger Guidelines, Antitrust, Fall 2010.

Economics
 

± Gregory J. Werden & Kristen C. Limarzi, Forward-Looking Merger Analysis and the Superfluous Potential Competition Doctrine, 77 Antitrust L.J. 109 (2010).

± John Kwoka & Evgenia Shumilkina, The Price Effect of Eliminating Potential Competition: Evidence from an Airline Merger (____), final version at 58 J. Indus. Econ. 767 (2010).

John Kwoka, Eliminating Potential Competition, in 2 Issues in Competition Law and Policy 1437 (ABA Section of Antitrust Law 2008).

± Mats A. Bergman, Potential Competition: Theory, Empirical Evidence and Legal Practice (Sept. 9, 2003).

Vertical Foreclosure

Comcast/NBC Universal

Seminal cases
 

United States v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 353 U.S. 586 (1957) (± Oyez)

Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294 (1962) (± Oyez)

Ford Motor Co. v. United States, 405 U.S. 562 (1972) (Autolite) (± Oyez)

—Acquisition

Comcast Corp. & GE, Press Release, Comcast and GE to Create Leading Entertainment Company (Dec. 3, 2009).

Master Agreement Dated as of December 3, 2009 Among General Electric Company, NBC Universal, Inc., Comcast Corporation and Navy, LLC (Dec. 3, 2009)

General Electric Investor Update: NBCU (Dec. 3, 2009)

—Complaint

Complaint, United States v. Comcast Corp., No. 1:11-cv-00106 (D.D.C. Jan. 18, 2011)

U.S. Dep't of Justice, Antitrust Div., News Release, Justice Department Allows Comcast-NBCU Joint Venture To Proceed with Conditions (Jan. 18, 2011)

Docket sheet (downloaded Mar. 7, 2014)

± DOJ web page

± Comcast NBCUniversal web page

—Consent settlement

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (Jan. 18, 2011)

Exhibit A: [Proposed] Final Judgment

Exhibit B: Plaintiff United States' Explanation of Consent Decree Procedures

 

Competitive Impact Statement (Jan. 18, 2011)

U.S. Dep't of Justice, Press Release, Justice Department Allows Comcast-NBCU Joint Venture to Proceed with Conditions (Jan. 18, 2011)

Notice of Filing of Determinative Document (Jan. 26, 2011)

Stipulation and Order (signed Feb. 22, 2011)

Report and Certification of Compliance with Tunney Act Requirements on Behalf of Defendants Comcast Corporation, General Electric Co., and NBC Universal, Inc. (Apr. 18, 2011)

 

 


 

 

Plaintiff United States's Response to Public Comments (June 6, 2011)

Public comments

Appendix A (June 6, 2011)
Appendix B (June 6, 2011)
Appendix C (June 6, 2011)
Appendix D (June 6, 2011)
Appendix E (June 6, 2011)
Appendix F (June 6, 2011)
Appendix G (June 6, 2011)
Appendix H (June 6, 2011)

 

 

United States' Motion and Supporting Memorandum to Enter Final Judgment (June 29, 2011)

Certificate of Compliance with Provisions of the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act (June 29, 2011)

Supplemental Statement of The United States in Support of Entry of the Final Judgment (Aug. 5, 2011)

Memorandum Order (Sept. 1, 2011)

Final Judgment (Sept. 1, 2011)

 

 

First Annual Report (Sept. 4, 2012)

Defendants’ Unopposed Joint Motion & Supporting Memorandum To Amend Final Judgment To Exclude Obligations With Respect To General Electric Company (June 4, 2013)

Modified Final Judgment (Aug. 21, 2013)

Second Annual Report (Sept. 3, 2013)

—FCC proceedings
 

± Memorandum Opinion and Order, In re Comcast Corp., MB Docket No. 10-56 (FCC Jan. 18, 2011)

± Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, Press Release, FCC Grants Approval of Comcast-NBCU Transaction (Jan. 18, 2011)

± Statement of Commissioner Mignon L. Clyburn

± Joint Concurring Statement of Commissioners Robert M. McDowell and Meredith Attwell Baker

± Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Michael J. Copps

± FCC web page

The Comcast/NBC Universal Merger: What Does the Future Hold for Competition and Consumers?: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights of the Sen. Comm. on the Judiciary, 11th Cong. (Feb. 4, 2010) (S. Hrg. 111–976).

Mark Israel & Michael L. Katz, Application of the Commission Staff Model of Vertical Foreclosure to the Proposed Comcast-NBCU Transaction, Report Submitted to the Federal Communications Commission on Behalf of Comcast, General Electric, and NBC Universal (Feb. 26, 2010)

Applicants' Economic Reports (May 4, 2010)

Gregory L. Rosston, An Economic Analysis of the Competitive Benefits from the Comcast NCBU Transaction

Mark Israel & Michael L. Katz, The Comcast/NBCU Transaction and Online Video Distribution (May 4, 2010)

Applicants' Opposition to Petitions to Deny and Response to Comments (June 21, 2010)

Gregory L. Rosston & Michael D. Topper, The Proposed Comcast-NBCU Transaction: Response to Comments and Petitions Regarding Competitive Benefits and Advertising Competition (July 21, 2010)

Mark Israel & Michael L. Katz, Economic Analysis of the Proposed Comcast-NBCU-GE Transaction (July 20, 2010)

American Cable Association, Comments (June 21, 2010)

Exhibit A: William P. Rogerson, Economic Analysis of the Competitive Harms of the Proposed Comcast-NBCU Transaction (June 21, 2010) (Rogerson I)

Exhibit B: Declaration of Steve Friedman

Exhibit C: Declaration of Robert Gessner

Mark Israel & Michael L. Katz, Responses to Commission Econometrics Questions (Oct. 25, 2010)

Mark Israel & Michael L. Katz, Response to Professor Rogerson's Comments on Double Marginalization (Oct. 25, 2010)

American Cable Association, Reply (Aug. 19, 2010)

Exhibit A: William P. Rogerson, A Further Economic Analysis of the
Proposed Comcast-NBCU Transaction
(Aug. 19, 2010) (Rogerson II)

Exhibit B: Declaration of Robert Gessner

Exhibit C: ACA’s Proposed Comcast-NBCU License Transfer Conditions

William P. Rogerson, An Estimate of the Consumer Harm that Will Result from the Comcast-NBCU Transaction, Report Submitted to the Federal Communications Communication on behalf of the American Cable Association (Nov. 8, 2010) (Rogerson III)

Commentary:

± Susan Crawford Blog, FCC Conditions on Comcast/NBCU

± Jonathan B. Baker, Comcast/NBCU: The FCC Provides a Roadmap for Vertical Merger Analysis (Feb. 5, 2011)

Ticketmaster/Live Nation

Complaint, United States v. Ticketmaster Entertainment, Inc., No. 1:10-cv-00139 (D.D.C. filed Jan. 25, 2010)

For additional materials, see Case Studies.

Amended Complaint (Jan. 28, 2010) (joining New Jersey and Washington have joined as plaintiffs)

Significant lower court precedents
 

± Fruehauf Corp. v. FTC, 603 F.2d 345 (2d Cir. 1979)

± Alberta Gas Chems. v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 826 F.2d 1235 (3d Cir. 1987)

Economics
 

± Steven C. Salop & Daniel P. Culley, Potential Competitive Effects of Vertical Mergers: A How-To Guide for Practitioners (Nov. 10, 2014).

± Simon Loertscher & Markus Reisinger, Market Structure and the Competitive Effects of Vertical Integration (Jan. 30, 2014).

± Serge Moresi & Steven C. Salop, vGUPPI: Scoring Unilateral Pricing Incentives in Vertical Mergers (Georgetown Business, Economics and Regulatory Law Research Paper No. 12-022, June 18, 2012).

± Timothy Bresnahan & Jonathan Levin, Vertical Integration and Market Structure (Jan. 30, 2012).

± Christine Siegwarth Meyer & Yijia (Isabelle) Wang, Determining the Competitive Effects of Vertical Integration in Mergers (2011).

± Marie-Laure Allain, Claire Chambolle & Patrick Rey, Vertical Integration, Innovation and Foreclosure (Sept. 14, 2010).

± Hans-Theo Normann, Vertical Mergers, Foreclosure and Raising Rivals’ Costs–Experimental Evidence (Sept. 2010).

Jeffrey Church, Vertical Mergers, in 2 Issues in Competition Law and Policy 1455 (ABA Section of Antitrust Law 2008).

± Michael H. Riordan, Competitive Effects of Vertical Integration (2005), final version published in Handbook of Antitrust Economics 353 (Paolo Buccirossi ed. 2008).

± David T. Scheffman & Richard S. Higgins, Vertical Mergers: Theory and Policy, 12 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 967 (2004).

± Yongmin Chen, On Vertical Mergers and their Competitive Effects, 32 RAND J. Econ. 667 (2001).

Michael A. Salinger, Vertical Mergers and Market Foreclosure, 103 Q.J. Econ. 345 (1998).

Michael H. Riordan & Steven C. Salop, Evaluating Vertical Mergers, 63 Antitrust L.J. 513 (1995).

± Patrick Boulton & Michael D. Whinston, The "Foreclosure" Effect of Vertical Mergers, 147 J. Institutional & Theoretical Econ. 207 (1991).

± Oliver Hart & Jean Tirole, Vertical Integration and Market Foreclosure, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Microeconomics (1990).

Janusz Ordover, Steven Salop & Garth Saloner, Equilibrium Vertical Foreclosure, 80 Am. Econ. Rev. 127 (1990).

± Oliver E. Williamson, The Vertical Integration of Production: Market Failure Considerations, 61 Am. Econ. Rev. 112 (1971).

Vertical Information Conduits

Coca-Cola/CCE
   
—Acquisition

± Coca-Cola Enterprises, News Release, The Coca-Cola Company and Coca-Cola Enterprises Strategically Advance and Strengthen Their Partnership (Feb. 25, 2010)

± Investor Presentation (Feb. 25, 2010)

± Business Separation and Merger Agreement by and among Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc., International CCE, Inc., The Coca-Cola Company, and Cobalt Subsidiary LLC dated as of February 25, 2010

—Complaint

Complaint, In re Coca-Cola Co., C-4305 (FTC accepted for public comment Sept. 27, 2010) (FTC news release)

Fed. Trade Comm'n, News Release, FTC Puts Conditions on Coca-Cola's $12.3 Billion Acquisition of its Largest North American Bottler (Sept. 27, 2010)

± FTC web site

—Consent settlement

Decision and Order (FTC accepted for public comment Sept. 27, 2010)

Agreement Containing Consent Order (Sept. 27, 2010)

Decision and Order (Sept. 27, 2010) (appendices A & B)

Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order to Aid Public Comment (Sept. 27, 2010)

Commission Letters Approving Monitor and Monitor Agreement (Oct. 7, 2010)

Final Decision and Order (Nov. 5, 2010) (Appendices A and B)

Conglomerate Theories

Economics
 

± J. Thomas Rosch, Comm'r, Fed. Trade Comm'n, Terra Incognita: Vertical and Conglomerate Merger and Interlocking Directorate Law Enforcement, Remarks Before the University of Hong Kong (Sept. 11, 2009).

± Jeffrey Church, Conglomerate Mergers, in 2 Issues in Competition Law and Policy 1503 (ABA Section of Antitrust Law 2008).

± Bundeskartellamt, Conglomerate Mergers in Merger Control: Review and Prospects, Discussion paper for the meeting of the Working Group on Competition Law on 21 Sept. 2006.

± Damien J. Neven, The Analysis of Conglomerate Effects in EU Merger Control (Dec. 2005).

Non-U.S. enforcement
 

± Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Directorate for Financial and Enterprise Affairs Competition Committee, Vertical Mergers (DAF/COMP(2007)21, Nov. 12, 2007)

Director and Management Interlocks

Statute

± Clayton Act § 8, 15 U.S.C. § 19.

 

Reference Materials

Commentary

Donald F. Turner, Conglomerate Mergers and Section 7 of the Clayton Act, 78 Harv. L. Rev. 1313 (1965)

Recent vertical foreclosure cases

Complaint, United States v. Google, Inc., No. 1:11-cv-00688 (D.D.C. Apr. 8, 2011) (DOJ news release)

See below

Complaint, In re PepsiCo, Inc., Dkt. No. C-____ (FTC filed Feb. 26, 2010) (news release)

Agreement Containing Consent Order (Feb. 26, 2010)
Decision and Order (Feb. 26, 2010)
Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order To Aid Public Comment (Feb. 26, 2010)
± FTC web site

Recent vertical information flow cases
 
European competition law

European Comm'n, Guidelines on the assessment of non-horizontal mergers under the Council Regulation on the control of concentrations between undertakings, 2008 O.J. (C 256) 6.

European Comm'n, Economic Advisory Group for Competition Policy (EAGCP), Merger Sub-Group, Non-Horizontal Mergers Guidelines: Ten Principles (Aug. 17, 2006).

± Patrick Maydell, Non-horizontal Mergers under the EC Merger Regulation (Stanford–Vienna Transatlantic Technology Law Forum, European Union Law
Working Paper No. 3, 2012).

Jeffrey Church, The Impact of Vertical and Conglomerate Mergers on Competition, Report Prepared for Directorate General for Competition Directorate B Merger Task Force, Eur. Comm'n (Sept. 2004).

Director and management interlocks

Robert F. Booth Trust v. Crowley, No. 10-3285 (7th Cir. 2012) (reported at 687 F.3d 314) (reversing and remanding with instructions to dismiss a derivative action) (± oral argument)

Cia. Petrolera Caribe, Inc. v. Arco Caribbean, Inc., 754 F.2d 404 (1st Cir. 1985)

Borg-Warner Corp. v. FTC, 746 F.2d 108 (2d Cir. 1984)

Case Studies

AT&T/Time Warner (DOJ 2017)
Mallinckrodt/Novartis AG (FTC 2017)
Mylan/Perrigo (FTC 2016)
Steris/Synergy Health (FTC 2015)
Medtronic/Covidien (FTC 2014)
Akorn/VersaPharm (FTC 2014)
Nielsen/Arbitron (FTC 2013)
General Electric/Avio (FTC 2013)
Deutsche Böurse/NYSE Euronext (DOJ 2011)
Google/ITA (DOJ 2011)
Ticketmaster/Live Nation (DOJ 2010)
TomTom/Tele Atlas// Nokia/NAVTEQ (Eur. Comm'n 2008) |
AOL/Time Warner (FTC 2000)
Merch/Medco (FTC 1998)

AT&T/Time Warner
(DOJ 2017)

The deal

AT&T Inc. & Time Warner Inc., Press Release, AT&T to Acquire Time Warner (Oct. 22, 2016)

Agreement and Plan of Merger among Time Warner Inc., AT&T Inc., and West Merger Sub, Inc. Dated As Of October 22, 2016

AT&T analyst call transcript (Oct. 22, 2016) (presentation)

AT&T Inc., Form 425 (Oct. 24, 2016) (re AT&T Statement on TWX-TWC Confusion)

AT&T Inc., Form 425 (Oct. 24, 2016) (AT&T Acquires Time Warner – Q&A)

DOJ action

Complaint, United States v. AT&T Inc., No. 1:17-cv-02511 (D.D.C. filed Nov. 30, 2017)

Case Assigned to Judge Christopher R. Cooper
Reassigned to Judge Richard Leon (who entered the Comcast/NBCUniversal consent decree)

Docket sheet (downloaded Nov. 21, 2017)

U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Antitrust Div., Press Release, Justice Department Challenges AT&T/Directv’s Acquisition of Time Warner (Nov. 30, 2017)

AT&T Inc., News Release, AT&T Statement on Latest Developments in Proposed Acquisition of Time Warner, Inc. (Nov. 30, 2017)

Background on DOJ: Vertical Merger Precedent

Background on the Government's Lawsuit

± AT&T web page on Time Warner acquisition

Mallinckrodt/Novartis AG
(FTC 2017)

± Questcor Pharmaceuticals, Inc., News Release, Questcor Pharmaceuticals Closes Transaction to Acquire International Rights to Synacthen® and Synacthen® Depot (June 23, 2014)

Note: On August 14, 2014, Mallinckrodt plc acquired Questor Pharmaceuticals for $5.8 billion. See Mallinckrodt plc, News Release, Mallinckrodt Completes Acquisition of Questcor Pharmaceuticals (Aug. 14, 2014). On July 27, 2015, Questor Pharmaceuticals was renamed Mallinckrodt ARD Inc.

Complaint for Injunctive and Other Equitable Relief, FTC v. Mallinckrodt ARD Inc., No. 1:17-cv-00120 (D.D.C. filed Jan. 18, 2017; redacted version filed Jan. 25, 2017) (FTC news release)

Docket sheet (downloaded Feb. 13, 2017)

Concurring Statement of Commissioner Maureen K. Ohlhausen (Jan. 18, 2017)

Mallinckrodt plc, News Release, Mallinckrodt and Federal Trade Commission Resolve Questcor Matter (Jan. 18, 2017)

Joint Motion for Entry of Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction and Equitable Monetary Relief (Jan. 18, 2017)

[Proposed] Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction and Equitable Monetary Relief (Jan. 18, 2017) (so ordered Jan. 30, 2017)

Related case

Complaint, Retrophin, Inc. v. Questcor Pharm., Inc., No. 8:14-cv-00026-JLS-JPR (C.D. Cal. filed Jan. 7, 2014)

Docket sheet (downloaded Mar. 14, 2017)

Order Denying Motion to Dismiss, Retrophin, Inc. v. Questcor Pharm., Inc., No. 8:14-cv-00026-JLS-JPR (C.D. Cal. 2014) (reported at 41 F. Supp. 3d 906)

Stipulation of Dismissal of Action with Prejudice (June 4, 2015)

NB: On June 4, 2015, pursuant to the terms of a Confidential Settlement Agreement and Release (the “Settlement Agreement”) the Company [Retrophin] and Questcor filed a Stipulation of Dismissal, dismissing the Company’s lawsuit against Questcor. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, Questcor paid the Company $15.5 million, recorded as “Litigation Settlement Gain” in the quarter ended June 30, 2015, and the Company and Questcor granted a mutual release of all claims against the other. ± Retrophin, Inc., Form 10-Q for the quarterly perid ending June 30, 2015.

 

Commentary

± Andrew Pollack, Questcor Finds Profits, at $28,000 a Vial, NYTimes.com (Dec. 29, 2012)

± Andrew Pollack, Questcor Pays $135 Million to Acquire Rights to a Competitor’s Drug, NYTimes.com (June 14, 2014)

± Charles Ornstein, The Obscure Drug With a Growing Medicare Tab, ProPublica (Aug. 4, 2014)

± Cynthia Koons & Robert Langreth, Mallinckrodt's $35,000 Drug Is Back in the Spotlight, Bloomberg.com (Nov. 9, 2015)

± Tracy Staton, Mallinckrodt’s Acthar Drama Continues with $100M FTC Settlement, FiercePharma.com (Jan. 19, 2017)

± Gregory E. Heltzer & Melanie A. Hallas, THE LATEST: Losing Bidder for Pharmaceutical Triggers FTC Investigation, Fix, and $100 Million Fine in Non-HSR-Reportable Transaction, NationalLawReview.com (Mar. 14, 2017).

Mylan/Perrigo
(FTC 2015)

Mylan N.V., Press Release, Mylan to Launch Offer for Perrigo Directly to Perrigo Shareholders on Sept. 14 (Sept. 8, 2015)

Perrigo Company plc, Press Release, Perrigo Responds to Misleading Letter from Mylan Executive Chairman (Sept. 10, 2015)

Mylan N.V., Press Release, Mylan Commences Offer to Acquire Perrigo (Sept. 14, 2015)

Complaint, In re Mylan N.V., Dkt. No. C-4557 (F.T.C. issued Nov. 2, 2015) (FTC news release—issued Nov. 3, 2015)

Agreement Containing Consent Orders (Nov. 3, 2015)
Decision and Order(Nov. 3, 2015)
Order to Maintain Assets (Nov. 2, 2015)
Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Orders to Aid Public Comment (Nov. 3, 2015)

Federal Register Notice (Nov. 10, 2015)

Decision and Order (Feb. 19, 2016) (FTC news release)

± FTC web page

Perrigo Company plc, Press Release, Perrigo Shareholders Convincingly Reject Mylan's Tender Offer, Expressing Confidence in Perrigo's Long-Term Strategy (Nov. 13, 2015)

Steris/Synergy Health
(FTC 2015)

See Merger Litigation

Medtronic/Covidien
(FTC 2014)

Medtronic, Inc. and Covidien, Press Release, Medtronic to Acquire Covidien for $42.9 Billion in Cash and Stock (June 15, 2014)

Complaint, In re Medtronic, Inc., Dkt. No. C-4503 (F.T.C. filed Jan. 13, 2015) (FTC news release—issued Nov. 26, 2015)

Agreement Containing Consent Orders (Nov. 26, 2014)
Decision and Order (Nov. 26, 2014)
Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Orders to Aid Public Comment (Nov. 26, 2014)

Federal Register Notice (Dec. 5, 2014)

Decision and Order (Jan. 13, 2015)

± FTC web page

Medtronic, Inc., Press Release, Medtronic Completes Acquisition of Covidien (Jan. 26, 2015)

The Spectranetics Corporation, Press Release, Spectranetics Completes Acquisition of Stellarex(TM) Drug Coated Balloon Assets From
Covidien
(Jan. 27, 2015)

Akorn/VersaPharm
(FTC 2014)

± Akorn, Inc. Investor Presentation on the VersaPharm Acquisition (May 12, 2014)

Complaint, In re Akron, Inc., No. C-4479 (Aug. 1, 2014) (FTC news release—issued Aug. 4, 2014)

Agreement Containing Consent Orders (Aug. 1, 2014)
Decision and Order (Aug. 1, 2014)
Order to Maintain Assets (Aug. 1, 2014)
Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Orders to Aid Public Comment (Aug. 1, 2014)

Federal Register Notice (Aug. 12, 2014)

Decision and Order (Sept. 16, 2014)

± FTC web page

Nielsen/Arbitron
(FTC 2013)

See above

General Electric/Avio
(FTC 2013)

General Electric, Press Release, GE to Acquire Aviation Business of Avio S.p.A (Dec 21, 2012)

Complaint, In re General Electric Co., No. C-4411 (FTC issued Aug. 27, 2013) (FTC News Release—issued July 19, 2013)

Agreement Containing Consent Orders (July 19, 2013)
Decision and Order (July 19, 2013)
Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Orders to Aid Public Comment (July 19, 2013)

Federal Register Notice (July 26, 2014)

Decision and Order (Aug. 27, 2013)

± FTC web page

 

 

Deutsche Böurse/NYSE Euronext
(DOJ 2011)

Complaint ¶¶ 29-30, United States v. Deutsche Bõrse AG, No. 1:11-cv-02280 (D.D.C. filed Dec. 22, 2011) (requiring the divestiture of Direct Edge in connection with the merger with NYSE Euronext, alleging among other this the elimination of Direct Edge as a potential competitor of NYSE in listing services for exchange-traded products) (DOJ news release)

Stipulation and Order (Dec. 22, 2011)

[Proposed] Final Judgment (Dec. 22, 2011)

Competitive Impact Statement (Dec. 22, 2011)

Plaintiff United States' Explanation of Consent Decree Procedures (Dec. 22, 2011)

Google/ITA
(DOJ 2011)

Complaint, United States v. Google Inc., No. 1:11-cv-00688 (D.D.C. filed Apr. 8, 2011) (news release)

± DOJ web site

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (Apr. 8, 2011)
[Proposed] Final Judgment (Apr. 8, 2011)

Exhibit 1 to the [Proposed] Final Judgment (Redacted) (Apr. 8, 2011)

Competitive Impact Statement (Apr. 8, 2011)
Plaintiff United States' Explanation of Consent Decree Procedures (Apr. 8, 2011)
Stipulation and Order (Apr. 12, 2011)
United States' Motion to Enter Final Judgment and Supporting Memorandum of Points and Authorities (July 7, 2011)

Exhibit A: [Proposed] Final Judgment
Exhibit B: Certificate of Compliance with Provision of the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act

Final Judgment (Oct. 5, 2011)

Commentary

Michael D. Topper, Stanley Watt & Jingming "Marshall" Yan, Google-ITA: Creating a New Flight Search Competitor (2011), in The Antitrust Revolution 385 (John E. Kwoka, Jr. & Lawrence J. White eds., 6th ed. 2014).

± FairSearch.org, Google’s Flight Search: Today’s Example That “Trust Us” Is Not Enough (Nov. 17, 2011)

± FairSearch.org, Press Release, FairSearch.org Coalition Applauds Justice Department for Challenge to Google-ITA Deal (Apr. 8, 2011)

± Daniel A. Crane, Let’s Calm Down On The Google-ITA Deal, TechCrunch.com (Feb. 26, 2011)

Randy Stutz, American Antitrust Institute, An Examination of the Antitrust Issues Posed by Google’s Acquisition of ITA (Feb. 18, 2011)

± Brett Snyder, Google-ITA Rewards Orbitz and Undercuts Merger Opposition at the Same Time, CBS MoneyWatch.com (Feb. 8, 2011)

± FairSearch.org, Press Release, FairSearch.org Coalition Grows, New U.S. and International Travel Members Urge Justice Department to Challenge Google-ITA Deal (Dec. 13, 2010)

± FairSearch.org, Press Release, Online Travel and Technology Companies Launch FairSearch.org Coalition, Urge Justice Department to Challenge Google-ITA Deal (Oct. 26, 2010)

Google Inc., Facts about Google’s acquisition of ITA Software (web site)

Comcast/NBC Universal
(DOJ 2011)

See above

Ticketmaster/Live Nation
(DOJ 2010)

Complaint, United States v. Ticketmaster, No. 1:10-cv-00139 (D.C.C. filed Jan. 25, 2010)

Exhibit A: Proposed Final Judgment
Exhibit B: United States' Explanation of Consent Decree Procedures
Exhibit C: Hold Separate Stipulation and [Proposed] Order

Competitive Impact Statement (Jan. 25, 2010)

Exhibit A - Letter of Agreement

U.S. Dep't of Justice, Press Release, Justice Department Requires Ticketmaster Entertainment Inc. to Make Significant Changes to its Merger with Live Nation Inc. (Jan. 25, 2010)
Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by Assistant Attorney General Christine Varney at Ticketmaster/Live Nation Pen-and-Pad Briefing (Jan. 25, 2010)

Anaylsis and commentary

John E. Kwoka, Jr., Rockonomics: The Ticketmaster-Live Nation Merger and the Rock Concert Business (2010), in The Antitrust Revolution 62 (John E. Kwoka, Jr. & Lawrence J. White eds. 2014).

± Alan J. Meese & Barak D. Richman, A Careful Examination of the Live Nation-Ticketmaster Merger (William & Mary Law School Research Paper No. 09-41, Nov. 25, 2009).

± James D. Hurwitz, Commentary: Ticketmaster–Live Nation (AAI white paper, Apr. 28, 2009).

TomTom/Tele Atlas
Nokia/NAVTEQ
(Eur. Comm'n 2008)

± Case No. COMP/M.4942, Nokia/ NAVTEQ, Commission Decision of 2 July 2008 (EC web site)
± Case No. COMP/M.4854, TomTom/Tele Atlas, Commission Decision of 14 May 2008 (EC web site)

± Carles Esteva Mosso, Michal Mottl, Raphaël De Coninck & Franck Dupont, Digital maps go vertical: TomTom/Tele Atlas and Nokia/NAVTEQ, Competition Pol'y Newsletter, No. 3, 2008.

Raphaël De Coninck, Chief Economist Team, DG COMP, Eur. Comm'n, TomTom/Tele Atlas, PowerPoint Presentation at the 2008 ACE Conference (Nov. 27, 2008).

± Charles River Associates, TomTom/Tele Atlas: European Non-Horizontal Merger Guidelines in practice (Aug. 2008).

± RBB Brief 32, Nokia/NAVTEQ – navigating the non-horizontal merger guidelines (Nov. 2009).

AOL/Time Warner (FTC 2000)

Complaint, In re America Online, Inc., No. C-3989 (F.T.C. filed Dec. 14, 2000) (± news release)

Agreement Containing Consent Orders (Dec. 14, 2000)
Decision and Order (Dec. 14, 2000)

Concurring Statement of Commissioner Thompson (Dec. 14, 2000)

Order to Hold Separate (Dec. 14, 2000)
Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to Aid Public Comment (Dec. 14, 2000)

Letter Appointing Monitor Trustee and Approving Monitor Trustee Agreement (Feb. 26, 2001)

Final Decision and Order (Apr. 18, 2001)

Concurring Statement of Commissioner Thompson (Dec. 14, 2000)

± FTC web site

Merck/Medco
(FTC 1998)

Complaint, In re Merck & Co., No. C-3853 (Feb. 18, 1999) (FTC news release—issued Aug. 27, 1998)

In re Merck & Co., 127 F.T.C. 156 (Feb. 18, 1999)

Agreement Containing Consent Orders (Aug. 27, 1998)
Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Orders to Aid Public Comment (Aug. 27, 1998)

Federal Register Notice (Sept. 1, 1998)

Decision and Order (Feb. 18, 1999)

± FTC web page

 

11. Horizontal Mergers

13. Merger Review