44 (1992)

 

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

13. Merger review and settlment

 

15. Merger risk assessment

 

 

14. Merger Litigation

 

Reading and class notes
Merger enforcement statistics and reports
AB Inbev/Grupo Modelo
AT&T/T-Mobile
FTC Section 13(b) merger litigation
FTC administrative merger litigation
Private merger litigation
"Litigating the fix"
Reference materials
Case studies

 
Primary Materials
Supplemental Materials

Reading and Class Notes

Reading and class notes

Unit 14 reading

Unit 14 class notes

Recent DOJ/FTCC merger litigations

 

Merger Enforcement Statistics and Reports

Merger enforcement statistics

 

± FTC Competition Enforcement Database

± DOJ Merger Enforcement web page

Fed. Trade Comm'n, Horizontal Merger Investigation Data, Fiscal Years 1996-2011 (Jan. 2013)

Fed. Trade Comm'n, Administrative Litigation Following the Denial of a Preliminary Injunction: Policy Statement, 60 Fed. Reg. 39,741 (Aug. 3, 1995)

Fed. Trade Comm'n, Protocol for Coordination in Merger Investigations between the Federal Enforcement Agencies and State Attorneys General (1998).

HSR Annual Reports
 

Fed. Trade Comm'n & U.S. Dep't of Justice, Hart-Scott-Rodino Annual Report Fiscal Year 2012
Fed. Trade Comm'n & U.S. Dep't of Justice, Hart-Scott-Rodino Annual Report Fiscal Year 2011
Fed. Trade Comm'n & U.S. Dep't of Justice, Hart-Scott-Rodino Annual Report Fiscal Year 2010

Fed. Trade Comm'n & U.S. Dep't of Justice, Hart-Scott-Rodino Annual Report Fiscal Year 2009

Fed. Trade Comm'n & U.S. Dep't of Justice, Hart-Scott-Rodino Annual Report Fiscal Year 2008

± Previous HSR Annual Reports

DOJ Merger Litigation

AB Inbev/Grupo Modelo (DOJ 2013)

Deal

± Anheuser-Busch InBev, Press Release, Anheuser-Busch InBev and Grupo Modelo to Combine, Next Step in Long and Successful Partnership (June 29, 2012)

± Constellation Brands, News Release, Constellation Brands Inc. to Acquire Remaining 50 Percent Interest in Crown Imports Joint Venture (June 29, 2012)

U.S. Beer Landscape (prior to ABI/Modelo deal)

Transaction Agreement by and among Grupo Modelo, S.A.B. de C.V., Diblo, S.A. de C.V., Anheuser-Busch InBEV SA/NV, Anheuser-Busch International Holdings, Inc., and Anheuser-Busch México Holding, S. de R.L. de C.V. (dated as of June 28, 2012)

Anheuser-Busch InBev, , Investor Presentation (June 29, 2012)

Complaint

Complaint, United States v. Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV, 1:13-cv-00127 (D.D.C. filed Jan. 31, 2013) (DOJ news release)

Docket sheet (downloaded Nov. 16, 2013) (closed Apr. 9, 2013)

± DOJ web page

See American Anttirust Institute, Halting Beer’s March to Monopoly: The Likely Anticompetitive Effects of Anheuser-Busch Inbev’s Proposed Acquisition of Grupo Modelo (Nov. 2012)

Bernard Ascher, Global Beer: The Road To Monopoly (American Antitrust Institute 2012)

Motion to intervene

Constellation Brands, Inc.’s and Crown Imports LLC’s Motion to Intervene as Defendants (Feb. 7, 2013)

 

Statement of Points and Authorities in Support of Constellation Brands, Inc.'s and Crown Imports LLC's Motion to Intervene (Feb. 7, 2013)

Memorandum in Support of Constellation Brands, Inc.’s and Crown Imports LLC's Motion to Intervene (Feb. 8, 2013) (by ABI and Groupo Modelo)

ABI announcement of restructured transaction

Anheuser-Busch InBev, Press Release, Anheuser-Busch InBev and Constellation Brands Announce Revised Agreement for Complete Divestiture of U.S. Business of Grupo Modelo (Feb. 14, 2013)

See ± University of Oregon Investment Group, Constellation Brands (Apr. 26, 2013)

Motion to stay proceedings

Joint Motion to Stay Proceedings (Feb. 20, 2013)

Order (Feb. 22, 2013) (granting stay through March 19, 2013)

Joint Motion to Extend the Stay (Mar. 15, 2013)

Order (Mar. 20, 2013) (granting stay through Apr. 9, 2013)

Joint Motion for a Limited Extension of the Stay (Apr. 5, 2013)

Order (Apr. 9, 2013) (granting stay through Apr. 23, 2013)

 
DOJ consent settlement

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (Apr. 19, 2013) (DOJ news release)

Proposed Final Judgment (Apr. 19, 2013)

Competitive Impact Statement (Apr. 19, 2013)

United States' Explanation of Consent Decree Procedures (Apr. 19, 2013)

Exhibits to the Proposed Final Judgment

Exhibit A: Stock Purchase Agreement Between Anheuser-Busch InBEV SA/NV and Constellation Brands, Inc. (Apr. 24, 2013) (redacted)
Exhibit B:
Exhibit C:
Exhibit D: Filed under seal
Notice Regarding Filing of Sealed Material (Apr. 19, 2013)

Completion of transaction

± Anheuser-Busch InBev, Press Release, Anheuser-Busch InBev Completes Combination with Grupo Modelo (June 4, 2013)

Constellation Brands, News Release, Constellation Brands Completes
Acquisition of Grupo Modelo’s U.S. Beer Business
(June 7, 2013)

 
Appointment of monitoring trustss

Unopposed Motion to Approve the Appointment of William E. Berlin as Monitoring Trustee (June 21, 2013)

Order (June 26, 2013) (approving trustee)

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Unopposed Motion to Approve the Appointment of William E. Berlin as Monitoring Trustee (June 21, 2013)

Declaration of Michelle R. Seltzer (June 21, 2013)

Exhibit A of Declaration of Michelle R. Seltzer (June 21, 2013)

Public comments

Plaintiff United States’s Response to Public Comments (Sept. 13, 2013)

± Public comments (not reading)

United States's Unopposed Motion and Supporting Memorandum for Authorization to Excuse Federal Register Publication of Comments and Attachments (Aug. 1, 2013)

Order (Aug. 5, 2013) (granting motion)

Entry of final judgment

Plaintiff United States of America's Motion and Memorandum for Entry of the Proposed Final Judgment (Sept. 25, 2013)

[Proposed] Final Judgment (Sept. 25, 2013)

Exhibit A: Stock Purchase Agreement Between Anheuser-Busch InBEV SA/NV and Constellation Brands, Inc.) (Sept. 25, 2013) (redacted public version)
Exhibit B:
Exhibit C:
Exhibit D: Redacted

Certificate of Compliance with Provisions of the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act (Sept. 25, 2013)

Final Judgment (Oct. 24, 2013)

 
Private challenge to ABI/Modelo transaction

 

 

See Edstrom v. Anheuser-Busch InBEV SA/NV, No. 3:13-cv-01309-MMC (N.D. Cal. Mar. 22, 2013)

Commentary
 

± Orley C. Ashenfelter, Daniel Hosken & Matthew C. Weinberg, Efficiencies Brewed: Pricing and Consolidation in the U.S. Beer Industry ( Aug. 14, 2013) (analyzing the merger of SABMiller and Molson Coors in the United States).

Tunney Act standards
 

United States v. SBC Commc'ns, Inc., No. 05-2102 (EGS) (D.D.C. 2007) (reported at 489 F. Supp. 2d 1)

AT&T/T-Mobile

Bonus case:
AT&T/T-Mobile
(DOJ 2011)

AT&T Inc., Press Release, AT&T to Acquire T-Mobile USA From Deutsche Telekom (Mar. 20, 2011)

AT&T/T-Mobile Fact Sheet

Complaint, United States v. AT&T Inc., No. 1:11-cv-1560 (D.D.C. filed Aug. 31, 2011)

U.S. Dept. of Justice, Antitrust Div., News Release, Justice Department Files Antitrust Lawsuit to Block At&T’s Acquisition of T-Mobile (Aug. 31, 2011)

Joint Motion to Stay (Dec. 12, 2011)

Order (Dec. 12, 2011)

Stipulation of Dismissal (Dec. 20, 2011)

AT&T Inc., Form 8-K (Dec. 19, 2011) (reporting that the T-Mobile acquisition agreement was terminated on Dec. 19, 2011)

See below for more case materials

Stock Purchase Agreement by and between Deutsche Telekom AG and At&T Inc. (dated as of March 20, 2011)

 

FTC Section 13(b) Preliminary Injunction Merger Challenges

 

Acqusition
   
Complaint
   
SMARTER bill

Standard Merger and Acquisition Reviews Through Equal Rules Act of 2014, H.R. 5402, 113th Cong.

Favorably reported by the House Committee on the Judiciary (Dec. 11, 2014). See Standard Merger and Acquisition Reviews through Equal Rules Act of 2014, H.R. Rep. No. 113-658 (Dec. 11, 2014)

Standard Merger and Acquisition Reviews Through Equal Rules Act of 2015, H.R. 2745, 114th Cong.

Favorably reported by the House Committee on the Judiciary by a vote of 18-10 (June 12, 2015). See ± Bill Tracker

Standard Merger and Acquisition Reviews Through Equal Rules Act of 2016, H.R. 2745, 114th Cong., 2d Sess.

Favorably reported by the House Committee on the Judiciary (Mar. 14, 2016). See Standard Merger and Acquisition Reviews through Equal Rules Act of 2016, H.R. Rep. No. 114-449 (Dec. 11, 2014)

Passed the House on March 23, 2016, essentially along ±party lines

H.R. 2745, as received by the Senate and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary on April 4, 2016

 

See also 16 C.F.R. § 3.26 (amended Mar. 23, 2015) (modifying FTC's Rules of Practice to set forth sets forth two procedures by which respondents may obtain consideration of whether continuation of an FTC adjudicative proceeding is in the public interest after a court has denied preliminary injunctive relief in a separate proceeding brought under section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act),

Maureen K. Ohlhausen, Comm'nr, Fed. Trade Comm'n, A SMARTER Section 5, Remarks Before the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Washington, D.C. (Sept. 25, 2015).

Senate Judiciary Hearings (Oct. 7, 2015)

Prepared Statement of the Federal Trade Commission Before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights on S. 2102, The “Standard Merger and Acquisition Reviews Through Equal Rules Act of 2015,” Washington, D.C. (Oct.. 7, 2015).

Prepared Statement of Deborah A. Garza
Prepared Statement of David A. Clanton
Prepared Statement of Abbott B. Lipsky, Jr.
Prepared Statement of Jonathan M. Jacobson

Letter to the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law from the American Antitrust Institute (Apr. 9, 2014)

Hearing Before the United States House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law Hearing on the “Standard Merger And Acquisition Reviews Through Equal Rules (Smarter) Act of 2014" (Apr. 3, 2014)

Prepared Statement of Deborah A. Garza
Prepared States of John B. Kirkwood
Prepared Statement of Abbott B. Lipsky, Jr.
Prepared Statement of Richard G. Parker

Other commentary

± American Antitrust Institute, Antitrust Enforcement Data Shows SMARTER Act Is Not So Smart (not dated)

FTC Administrative Merger Trials

In re Dun & Bradstreet Corp.

Complaint

Administrative Complaint, In re Dun & Bradstreet Corp., Dkt. No. 9342 (FTC filed May 7, 2010) (± news release) (± FTC docket page)

 

Protective order

Protective Order Governing Discovery Material (May 13, 2010)

 
Answer

Answer and Defenses of Respondent The Dun & Bradstreet Corporation (May 26, 2010)

 
Scheduling order

Scheduling Order (June 3, 2010)

 
Witness list
 

Motion of Respondent Dun & Bradstreet regarding Complaint Counsel's Preliminary Witness List (July 1, 2010)

Complaint Counsel's Opposition to Respondent's Motion Regarding Complaint Counsel's Preliminary Witness List (July 9, 2010)

Administrative Law Judge’s Order Denying Respondent's Motion to Require Amended Preliminary Witness List (July 15, 2010)

Withdrawal from adjudication

Joint Motion to Withdraw Matter from Adjudication (Aug. 13, 2010)

Order Withdrawing Matter from Adjudication for the Purpose of Considering a Proposed Consent Agreement (Aug. 13, 2010)

 
Consent settlement
 

Agreement Containing Consent Order (Sept. 10, 2010)

± News Release (Sept. 10, 2010)

Decision and Order (Sept. 10, 2010) [Redacted Public Record Version]

Appendix C: Monitor Agreement (Sept. 10, 2010) [Redacted Public Record Version]

NB: Rather than first accept the consent decree provisionally, open the proceeding for public comments, and then have a second vote after any public comments ahve been reviewed, the Commission accepted the cosnent decree as final in its first vote.

Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order to Aid Public Comment (Sept. 10, 2010)

Federal Register Notice, 75 Fed. Reg. 57272 (Sept. 20, 2010)

Commentary
 

J. Thomas Rosch, Comm'r, Fed. Trade Comm'n, Three Questions About Part Three: Administrative Proceedings at the FTC, Remarks Before the American Bar Association Section of Antitrust Law Fall Forum, Washignton, D.C. (Nov. 8, 2012).

± D. Bruce Hoffman & M. Sean Royall, Administrative Litigation at the FTC: Past, Present, and Future, 71 Antitrust L.J. 319 (2003).

± Richard A. Posner, The Federal Trade Commission, 37 U. Chi. L. Rev. 47 (1969).

Private Actions to Enjoin a Merger

United/Continental

Merger agreement

Continental Airlines & United Airlines, Press Release, United and Continental Announce Merger of Equals to Create World-Class Global Airline (May 3, 2010)

Agreement and Plan of Merger among UAL Corporation, Continental Airlines, Inc., and JT Merger Sub Inc. (Oct. 2, 2010)

Closing of DOJ investigation

U.S. Dept. of Justice, Antitrust Div., Press Release, United Airlines and Continental Airlines Transfer Assets to Southwest Airlines in Response to Department of Justice’s Antitrust Concerns (Aug. 27, 2010)

Case No. COMP/M.5889, United Airlines/Continental Airlines, Commission decision of July 27, 2010 (declaring the concentration to be compatible with the common market)

Closing of merger

United Continental Holdings, Inc., Press Release, News Release, United and Continental Close Merger (Oct. 1, 2010)

 
Private complaint/answers

Complaint for Injunctive Relief Against Violations of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act, Malaney v. UAL Corp., Civ. No. 10-cv-2858 (N.D. Cal. filed June 29, 2010)

Docket sheet (downloaded Mar. 8, 2014)

Answer of Defendant UAL Corp. (Aug. 5, 2010)
Answer of Defendant Continental Airlines, Inc. (Aug. 5, 2010)

Scheduling Order (Aug. 10, 2010)

Discovery Order (Aug. 11, 2010)

Preliminary injunction

Order denying preliminary injunction (Sept. 29, 2010)

Notice of Appeal (Oct. 1, 2010)

Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 9, 2010)

Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 24, 2010) (redacted)

Rebuttal Report of Darren Bush (Aug. 26, 29010) (redacted)
Deposition designations (Darren Bush) (filed Aug. 24, 2010)

Defendants’ Joint Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 24, 2010) (redacted)

Testimony of Daniel Rubinfeld (Aug. 24, 2010) (Appendices A-D) (Exhibits 1-36)

Plaintiffs's Reply Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 29, 2010) (redacted)

Plaintiffs’ Post-Hearing Memorandum (Sept. 13, 2010)

Defendants’ Post-Hearing Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Sept. 13, 2010)

Defendants' Proposed Findings of Fact (Sept. 13, 2010)

Appeal from denial of preliminary injunction

Memorandum, Malaney v. UAL Corp., No. 10-17208 (9th Cir. May 23, 2011) (not for publication)

Mandate (July 18, 2011)

Docket sheet (downloaded Oct. 3, 2013)

Emergency Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal Seeking Temporary "Hold Separate" Order (Oct. 1, 2010)

Defendants-Appellees’ Joint Motion to Dismiss Appeal and Opposition to Plaintiffs-Appellants’ Emergency Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal (Oct. 5, 2013)

Plaintiffs-Appellants’ Opposition to Defendants-Appellees’ Motion to Dismiss and Reply in Support of Emergency Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal (Oct. 6, 2010)

Order (Oct. 6, 2010) (denying motion)

Appellants’ Opening Brief (Oct. 29, 2013)

Defendants-Appellees’ Answering Brief (Dec. 10, 2013)

Appellants’ Reply Brief (Jan. 1, 2011)

Petition for a writ of certiorari
 

Docket sheet (downloaded Oct. 3, 2013)

Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Oct 21, 2011)

Waiver of right of respondents UAL Corporation, et al. to respond filed (Nov 11, 2011)

Petition DENIED (Dec 12, 2011)

Amended complaint

First Amended Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief Against Violations of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act (Nov. 2, 2011)

Notice of Motion and Motion (Aug. 22, 2011) (to amend complaint to add damages count)

[Proposed] First Amended Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief Against Violations of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act (marked for changes)

Defendants’ Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint to Add Damages Claim (Sept. 20, 2011)

Plaintiffs’ Reply to Defendants’ Memorandum in Opposition to Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint to Add Damages Claim (Oct. 4, 2011)

Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Amend (Oct. 24, 2011)

Motion to dismiss

Order Granting Motion to Dismiss (Dec. 29, 2011)

Judgment (Dec. 29, 2011)

Bill of Costs (Dec. 29, 2011)

Notice of Appeal (Jan. 26, 2012)

Defendants’ Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6); Memorandum of Points and Authorities (Nov. 16, 2011)

Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (Dec. 6, 2011)

Reply Memorandum in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (Dec. 15, 2011)

Merits appeal

Memorandum, Malaney v. UAL Corp., No. 12-15182 (9th Cir. Jan. 16, 2014) (not for publication) (affirming dismissal of complaint)

Docket sheet (No. 12-15182) (downloaded on Mar. 9, 2014)

Appellants’ Opening Brief (Aug. 1, 2012)

Defendants-Appellees’ Answering Brief (Sept. 14, 2012)

Appellants’ Reply Brief (Oct. 26, 2012)

Motion for rehearing
 

Appellants’ Petition for Rehearing with a Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc (Jan. 30, 2014)

Order (Feb. 28, 2014) (denying petition for rehearing with a suggestion for rehearing en banc)

Supreme Court cert petition

 

 

"Litigating the Fix"

FTC v. Arch Coal

Memorandum Opinion, FTC v. Arch Coal, Inc., No. 04-0534 (JDB) (D.D.C. July 7, 2004).

Motion in Limine by Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission to Exclude All Evidence and Argument on the Issue of Remedy (June 3, 2004)

Response of Amicus Curiae Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. to Motion in Limine by Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission to Exclude All Evidence and Argument on the Issue of Remedy (June 9, 2004)

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's Memorandum in Reply to Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion in Limlne (June 14, 2004)

For more on Arch Coal, see Case Studies.

Cases
 

FTC v. Libbey Inc., 211 F. Supp. 2d 34 (D.D.C. 2002).

Docket sheet (downloaded Dec. 3, 2013)

Complaint for Preliminary Injunction Pursuant to Section 13(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (Jan. 14, 2002)

Order (Apr. 3, 2002)

Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants' Joint Motion to Vacate the Preliminary Injunction (____)

Plaintiff's Memorandum in Opposition To Defendants' Motion to Vacate this Court's Preliminary Injunction Order (May 13, 2002)

Order (May 20, 2002) (denying motion to vacate)

Order 2-3, United States v. Franklin Elec. Co., No. 00-C-0334-C, (W.D. Wis. July 19, 2000).

But cf. United States v. Dairy Farmers of Am., Inc., No. Civ.A. 03-206KSF, 2004 WL 2186215 (E.D. Ky. Aug. 31, 2004), rev’d 426 F.3d 850 (6th Cir. 2005).

Commentary
 

Thomas J. Horton, Fixing Merger Litigation "Fixes": Reforming the Litigation of Proposed Merger Remedies under Section 7 of the Clayton Act, 55 S.D. L. Rev. 165 (2010).

± Darren S. Tucker, The Elephant in the Room: Litigating the Fix After Arch Coal and Dairy Farmers, Antitrust Source, January 2006, at 1.

D. Bruce Hoffman, Remedial Self-Help in Mertger Litigation after Arch Coal, 19 Antitrust 32 (Spring 2005).

Reference Materials

Significant recent horizontal merger precedents

FTC v. CCC Holdings Inc., Civil Action No. 08-2043 (RMC) (D.D.C. Mar. 18, 2009) (reported as 605 F. Supp. 2d 26) (± FTC web page) (see case study)

Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. v. FTC, No. 05-60192 (5th Cir. 2008) (reported as 534 F.3d 410) (± FTC web page)

United States v. Oracle Corp., No C 04-0807 VRW ( (N.D. Ca. Sept. 9, 2004) (reported as 331 F. Supp. 2d 1098) (± DOJ web page)

See Case Studies for supplementary materials and commentary

± FTC v. H.J. Heinz Co., 246 F.3d 708 (D.C. Cir. 2001)

FTC v. Arch Coal, Inc., 329 F. Supp. 2d 109 (D.D.C. 2004) (FTC administrative proceedings)

See Case Studies for supplementary materials and commentary

FTC v. Staples, Inc., 970 F. Supp. 1066 (D.D.C. 1997)

See Case Studies for supplementary materials and commentary

± FTC v. Tenet Health Care Corp., 186 F.3d 1045 (8th Cir. 1999)

± United States v. Baker Hughes, Inc., 908 F.2d 981 (D.C. Cir. 1990)

± Hospital Corp. of Am. v. FTC, 807 F.2d 1381 (7th Cir. 1986)

Recent FTC horizontal merger challenges

± FTC Adjudicative Proceedings web page

Also look at the FTC's excellent ± Mergers Enforcement Database for links to all of the FTC merger actions since 1996.

FTC v. Laboratory Corp. of Am., No. 10-cv-01873-AG (C.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2011) (denying preliminary injunction)

See Case Studies for supplementary materials and commentary

Private merger actions

± M. Sean Royall & Adam J. Vincenzo, When Mergers Become A Private Matter: An Updated Antitrust Primer, Antitrust, Vol. 26, No. 2, Spring 2012, at 41.

Joint ventures

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

Acquisitions of minority interests

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

Enforcement strategy

± Paul B. Hewitt & David E. Altschuler, The FTC’s New Merger Litigation Strategy: Lessons From History, Threshold, Fall 2009, at 59.

± J. Thomas Rosch, Comm'r, Fed. Trade Comm'n, Litigating Merger Challenges: Lessons Learned, Remarks Before the Bates White Fifth Annual Antitrust Conference, Washington, D.C. (June 2, 2008)

Preliminary injunctions

± Morton Denlow, The Motion for a Preliminary Injunction: Time for a Uniform Federal Standard, 22 Rev. Litig. 495 (2003)

Economics of preliminary injunctions

± Thomas D. Jeitschko & Byung-Cheol Kim, Signaling, Learning and Screening Prior to Trial: Informational Implications of Preliminary Injunctions (EAG 11-2, Feb. 2011)

"Litigating the fix"

± Darren S. Tucker, The Elephant in the Room: Litigating the Fix after Arch Coal and Dairy Farmers, Antitrust Source, Jan. 2006.

Treatment of confidential information

± U.S. Chamber of Commerce, The Treatment of Confidential Information in Competition/Antitrust Administrative Proceedings: A Practitioner’s Survey (Apr. 2014)

Case Studies

Actions
FTC Section 13(b) Preliminary Injunction Actions

DraftKings/FanDuel (FTC 2017)
Energy Solutions/Waste Control Specialists (DOJ 2016)
Deere/Precision Planting (DOJ 2016)
Anthem/Cigna (DOJ 2016)
Aetna/Humana (DOJ 2016)
United Continental/Delta (DOJ 2015)
Electrolux/GE (DOJ 2015)
Albertsons/Safeway (state 2015)
Pacific Seafood Group (Broadman) (private 2015)
Verso Paper/Bucksport mill (private 2014)
AMR/USAir (DOJ/states 2013)
AMR/USAir (private 2013)
AB Inbev/Grupo Modelo (DOJ 2013)
AB Inbev/Grupo Modelo (private 2013)
Bazaarvoice/PowerReviews (DOJ 2013)
OSF/RMH (FTC 2011)
Twin America (DOJ/New York 2012)
Express Scripts/Medco Health Solutions (private action 2012)
FTC/St. Luke's (FTC 2013)
Saint Alphonsus/St. Luke's (private 2012)
Graco/Illinois Tool Works (FTC 2011)
HDD mergers (FTC, EC, China 2011)
AT&T/T-Mobile (DOJ 2011)
AT&T/T-Mobile (Sprint private action 2011)
H&R Block/TaxACT (DOJ 2011)
Phoebe Putney/Palmyra (FTC 2011)
ProMedica/St. Luke's Hosp. (FTC 2011)
Labcorp/Westcliff Med. Labs.(FTC 2011)
United/Continental (private action 2010)
Dun & Bradstreet/QED (FTC 2010)
Dean Foods (DOJ 2010)
Pfizer/Wyeth (private action 2010)
ES&S/Diebold (private action 2009)
Lundbeck/Abbott Labs (NeoProfen) (FTC 2008)
Whole Foods/Wild Oats Merger (FTC 2007)
Oracle/Peoplesoft (DOJ 2004)
Arch Coal/Triton (FTC 2004)
EchoStar/DirecTV (DOJ 2002)
Staples/Office Depot (FTC 1997)
Microsoft/Intuit (DOJ 1995)

± FTC merger enforcement press releases

Penn State Hershey Medical Center/ PinnacleHealth System (FTC 2016)
Staples/Office Depot (FTC 2015)
Advocate Health Care Network/NorthShore University HealthSystem (FTC 2015)
Steris/Synergy Health (FTC 2015)
Sysco/US Foods (FTC 2015)
Ardagh/Saint-Gobain (FTC 2013)
OSF/RMH (FTC 2011)
Staples/Office Depot (FTC 1997)

 

 

 

FTC Administrative Litigations

Omnicare/PharMerica (FTC 2012)
ProMedica Health System (FTC 2011)
Polypore/Microporous (FTC 2008)

Chicago Bridge/ Pitt-Des Moines (FTC 2001)

Coca-Cola/Dr Pepper (FTC 1986)

State Merger Litigations

Valero/Plains all American Pipeline (Calif. 2017)
Albertsons/Safeway (state 2015)

 

 

 

 

Terminated Transactions

Louisiana-Pacific/Ainsworth (DOJ 2014)
Jostens/American Achievement (FTC 2014)

   
Valero/Plains all American Pipeline
(Calif. 2017)

Amended Complaint for Injunctive Relief for Violations of the Clayton Act and Supplemental State Claims, California v. Valero Energy Corp., No. 3:17-cv-03786-WHA (N.D. Cal. filed Sept. 6, 2017) (oroginal complaint filed June 30, 2017)

Docket sheet (downloaded Sept. 20, 2017)

Plaintiffs’ Motion for and Memorandum in Support of Temporary Restraining Order (July 10, 2017; redacted Sept. 6, 2017)

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Entry of Protective Order (July 10, 2017)

Protective Order (July 10, 2017)

Order Denying TRO, Setting Briefing Schedule for Preliminary Injunction Motion, and Granting Limited Discovery (July12, 2017)

State of California’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support (July 25, 2017; redacted Sept. 6, 2017)

Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiff State of California’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (July 31, 2017; public version Aug. 2, 2017)

Order re Motion For Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 28, 2017) (denying motion)

Valero Energy Corporation and Plains All American Pipeline, L.P., News Release Valero Energy Corporation and Plains All American Pipeline, L.P. Elect to Terminate Proposed Acquisition by Valero of Certain Plains Assets (Sept. 18, 2017)

 

Commentary

± California Attorney General Sues to Stop Sale of Martinez Oil Terminal, KQED.com (July 20, 2017)

DraftKings/FanDuel
(FTC 2017)

DraftKings. Inc. & FanDuel Ltd., Press Release, FanDuel and DraftKings Agree to Strategic Merger of Equals (Nov. 18, 2016)

DraftKings. Inc., Consumer Questions and Answers (Nov. 18, 2016)

NB: The companies are not public and did not release a copy of the merger agreement.

 

D.D.C.

Complaint, FTC v. DraftKings, Inc., No. 1:17-cv-01195-KBJ (D.D.C. filed June 19, 2017) (filed under seal) (redacted version filed July 10, 2017) (California and the District of Columbia joined as plaintiffs)

Docket sheet (downloaded July 13, 2017)

Stipulation and Order (June 20, 2017) (entering stipulated TRO)

Protective Order (June 20, 2017)

Defendants DraftKings Inc. and FanDuel Ltd.’s Motion for Change of Venue Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1404(a) (July 7, 2017)

Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants DraftKings Inc. and FanDuel Ltd.’s Motion for Change of Venue Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1404(a) (June 28, 2017; redacted version filed July 7, 2017)

Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Change of Venue (June 29, 2017; redacted version filed July 6, 2017)

Reply Memorandum in Support of Defendants’ Motion for Change of Venue (June 30, 2017; redacted version filed July 7, 2017)

Order (July 7, 2017) (denying defenants' motion for change of venue)

Case Management and Scheduling Order (July 10, 2017)

Answer and Defenses of Defendant DraftKings Inc. (July 12, 2017)

Answer and Defenses of Defendant FanDuel Limited (July 12, 2017)

Administrative proceeding

Complaint, In re DraftKings, Inc., No. 9375 (F.T.C. issued June 19, 2017) (FTC press release)

Protective Order Governing Confidential Material (June 19, 2017)

± FTC web site

Termination of merger agreement

DraftKings. Inc., Press Release, CEO Jason Robins’ Statement on Merger Agreement Termination (July 13, 2017)

DraftKings. Inc., Q&A: What Today’S Announcement Means For Draftkings’ Customers (July 13, 2017)

Commentary

± Dustin Gouker, Well, That Escalated Slowly: Daily Fantasy Sports Sites DraftKings, FanDuel Sign Finalized Merger Agreement, Legal Sports Report.com, Nov. 18, 2016.

± Will Hobson, Daily Fantasy Sites DraftKings, FanDuel Reach Agreement to Merge, Wash. Post., Nov. 18, 2016.

 

Energy Solutions/Waste Control Specialists
(DOJ 2016)

Purchase Agreement by and between Rockwell Holdco, Inc., as Purchaser, and Andrews County Holdings, Inc., as Seller Dated as of November 18, 2015

Complaint, United States v. Energy Solutions, Inc., No. 1:16-cv-01056-GMS (D. Del. filed Nov. 16, 2016) (DOJ news release)

Docket sheet (downloaded Apr. 24, 2016)

Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue (Nov. 23, 2016)

Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue (Nov. 23, 2016)

United States’ Response Brief in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Transfer (Dec. 2, 2016)

Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue (Dec. 6, 2016)

Memorandum (Dec. 21, 2016) (denying defendants' motion to transfer venue)

Joint Proposed Stipulated Protective Order (Dec. 2, 2016) (so ordered Dec. 5, 2016)

Answer and Affirmative Defenses of Defendants EnergySolutions, Inc. and Rockwell Holdco, Inc. (Jan. 6, 2017)

Answer of Defendants Andrews County Holdings Inc. and Waste Control Specialists LLC (Jan. 6, 2017)

Case Reassigned to Judge Sue L. Robinson (Jan. 31, 2017)

Scheduling Order (Feb. 7, 2017)

Proposed Joint Pretrial Order (Apr. 11, 2017) (so rdered Apr. 18, 2017)

Exhibit 1
Exhibit 2-A
Exhibit 2-B

Memorandum Order (Apr. 21, 2017) (regarding upcoming bench trial)

Bench trial

Day 1: April 24 (DOJ opening statement)
Day 2: April 25
Day 3: April 26
Day 4: April 27
Day 5: April 28
Day 6: May 1
Day 7: May 2
Day 8: May 3
Day 9: May 4
Day 10: May 5 (Plaintiff's closing argument)

Order (June 21, 2017)

Opinion, United States v. Energy Solutions, Inc., No. 1:16-cv-01056-GMS (D. Del. June 21, 2017) (redacted version released July 12, 2017)

Judgment in a Civil Case (June 21, 2017)

Deere/Precision Planting
(DOJ 2016)

Complaint, United States v. Deere & Co., No. 1:16-cv-08515 (N.D. Ill. filed Aug. 31, 2016) (DOJ news release)

Docket sheet (downloaded Apr. 24, 2017)

Stipulated Confidentiality Protective Order (Sept. 22, 2016)

Scheduling and Case Management Order (Sept. 27, 2016)

Answer of Defendant Deere & Company (OCt. 12, 2016)

Precison Planting LLC and Monsanto Company's Answer (Oct. 12, 2016)

Joint Initial Status Report (Oct. 13, 2016)

Order Governing Designation and Use of Confidential Information at Trial (Dec. 20, 2016)

Revised Scheduling And Case Management Order (Jan. 17, 2017)

[Proposed] Revised Scheduling and Case Management Order (Mar. 14, 2017) (so ordered)

Third Revised Scheduling and Case Management Order (Apr. 4, 2017)

Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Apr. 5, 2017)

Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Apr. 5, 2017)

Defendants’ Local Rule 56.1 Statement of Material Facts as to Which There Is No Genuine Legal Issue (Apr. 5, 2017)

United States’ Pretrial Memorandum (Apr. 10, 2017)

Defendants’ Pretrial Brief (Apr. 10, 2017)

Joint Status Report (Apr. 21, 2017)

Order (Apr. 27, 2017) (pretrial matters)

 

Termination

Stipulation of Dismissal (May 1, 2017)

Monsanto Co., Press Release, Monsanto Terminates Agreement for Sale of Precision Planting Equipment Business (May 1, 2017)

Anthem/Cigna
(DOJ 2016)

Transaction

Anthem, Inc. and Cigna Corp., Press Release, Anthem Announces Definitive Agreement To Acquire Cigna Corporation (July 24, 2015)

Agreement and Plan of Merger Dated as of July 23, 2015 among Anthem, Inc., Anthem Merger Sub Corp. and Cigna Corporation

Anthem, Inc., Investor Presentation, Anthem-Cigna: A Compelling Combination

Anthem, Inc., Agreement Presentation, Anthem and Cigna: Combination Creates Premier Health Services Company

American Med. Ass'n, Letter to Willima Baer, Ass't Att'y Gen., Antitrust Div., U.S. Dep't of Justice, re Aetna’s proposed acquisition of Humana and Anthem’s proposed acquisition of Cigna (Nov. 11, 2015)

American Med. Ass'n, Markets Where an Anthem-Cigna Merger Warrants Antitrust Scrutiny

 

 

DOJ challenge

Complaint, United States v. Anthem, Inc., No. 1:16-cv-01493 (D.D.C. filed July 21, 2016)

Docket sheet (downloaded Feb. 16, 2017)

U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Antitrust Div., News Release, Justice Department and State Attorneys General Sue to Block Anthem’s Acquisition of Cigna, Aetna’s Acquisition of Humana (July 21, 2016)

Anthem, Inc., News Release, Anthem Statement Regarding Action by the Department of Justice (July 21, 2016)

Cigna Corp., News Release, Cigna Comments on DOJ Position Regarding Proposed Transaction with Anthem (July 21, 2016)

Notice of Designation of Related Civil Case (July 21, 2016) (relating to common issues f fact in United States v. Aetna, No. 16-cv-1494 (D.D.C. filed _July 21, 2016), challenging the Aetna/Humana merger)

Case Assigned to Judge John D. Bates as a related case (July 21, 2016)

Anthem’s Explanation of Its Positions As to Timing of Proceedings and Whether Proceedings Should Be Conducted Jointly with Those in Case 16-cv-1494 (Aug. 2, 2016)

Cigna Corporation’s Statement of Position As to Timing of Proceedings and Conduct of Case with Respect to 16-Cv-1494 (Aug. 2, 2016)

Joint Statement of Plaintiffs’ Position on the Scope and Timing of Proceedings (Aug. 2, 2016)

Transcript of hearing (Aug. 4, 2016)

Order (Aug. 5, 2016) (finding cases not related and ordering Anthem case to calendar for random reassignment)

Reassignment of Civil Case (Aug. 5, 2016) (from Judge Bates to Judge Amy Berman Jackson)

Note: As Judge Bates suggested in his August 5 order, Judge Jackson agreed to use the same special master to supervise discovery in both cases)

Transcript of Status Conference (Aug. 12, 2016)
Scheduling Order (Aug. 12, 2016)
Protective Order (Aug. 12, 2016)

Final Case Management Order (Aug. 31, 2016)

Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to Exclude the Declaration of Anthem’s Efficiencies Expert, Shubham Singhal, and Testimony from Defendants’ Experts Relying upon that Declaration (Nov. 2, 2016; redacted version filed Nov. 7, 2016)

Anthem's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine to Exclude Declaration of Shubham Singhal and Testimony from Defendants' Experts Relying Upon that Declaration (Nov. 8, 2016; redacted version filed Nov. 19, 2016)

Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine to Exclude Expert Opinion Testimony in Senator Benjamin Nelson's Declaration and Testimony from Defendants' Experts Relying upon that Declaration (Redacted)  (Nov. 2, 2016; redacted version filed Nov. 7, 2016)

Anthem's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine to Exclude Testimony in Senator Benjamin Nelson's Declaration and Testimony of Experts Relying Upon that Declaration (Nov. 7, 2016)

Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence of Purported Benefits Outside the Relevant Markets (Redacted) (Nov. 2, 2016; redacted version filed Nov. 7, 2016)

Anthem's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence of Purported Benefits Outside the Relevant Markets (Nov. 7, 2016)

Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine to Exclude Defendants' Declarations and Testimony from Defendants' Expert Witnesses Relying upon Those Declarations (Redacted) (Nov. 2, 2016; redacted version filed Nov. 9, 2016)

Anthem’s Redacted Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion In Limine to Exclude Defendants’ Declarations and Testimony from Defendants’ Expert Witnesses Relying uUpon those Declarations (Nov. 19, 2016)

Order on Motions In Limine and on Objections to Certain Exhibits (Nov. 16, 2016)

Anthem’s Pretrial Brief (Nov. 10, 2016)

Plaintiffs’ Pretrial Brief (Nov. 10, 2016)

Plaintiffs' Opening Statement [Redacted] (Nov. 21, 2016)

Plaintiffs' Opening Statement Phase II [Redacted] (Dec. 14, 2016)

Anthem’s Post-Trial Conclusions of Law Phase I: “National Accounts” (Dec. 15, 2016)

Plaintiff's Proposed Findings of Fact: Phase I [Redacted] (Dec. 16; redacted version filed Dec. 20, 2016)

Anthem's Proposed Findings of Fact Phase I: "National Accounts" (Dec. 20, 2016)

Order (Dec. 7, 2016) (compelling appearance of witness at trial)

Plaintiffs' Proposed Conclusions of Law (Phase II) (Jan. 6, 2017)

Anthem's Post-Trial Conclusions of Law Phase II: "Large Group Employers" & "Monopsony" (Jan. 6, 2017)

Plaintiffs’ Proposed Findings of Fact: Phase II (redacted version filed Jan. 17, 2017)

Anthem’s Post-Trial Proposed Findings of Fact Phase II The Alleged Large Group and Monopsony Local Markets (redacted version filed Jan. 17, 2017)

Anthem’s Supplemental Conclusions of Law Relating to the January 23, 2017 Opinion in United States v. Aetna (Jan. 25, 2017)

 

Order (Feb. 8, 2017) (enjoining transaction)

Memorandum Opinion (Feb. 8, 2017) (redacted version released Feb. 21, 2017)

Anthem, Inc., News Release, Anthem Responds to U.S. District Court’s Decision on Acquisition of Cigna (Feb. 9, 2017)

Cigna Corp., Press Release, Cigna Comments on District Court Decision to Enjoin the Proposed Transaction with Anthem (Feb. 9, 2017)

Notice of Appeal (Feb. 9, 2017)

 

D.C. Circuit

United States v. Anthem, Inc., No. 17-5024 (D.C. Cir. docketed Feb. 10, 2017)

Docket sheet (downloaded Apr. 27, 2017)

Emergency Motion of Appellant Anthem, Inc. for Expedited Consideration of Appeal (Feb. 13, 2017)

Response of the United States and Plaintiff States in Opposition to Defendant-Appellant’s Motion to Expedite (Feb. 15, 2017)

Appellant Anthem, Inc.'s Reply in Further Support of its Emergency Motion for Expedited Consideration of Appeal (Feb. 16, 2017)

Order (Feb. 17, 2017) (granting motion for expedited appeal)

 

Brief for Defendant-Appellant Anthem, Inc.(Feb. 13, 2017)

Brief for Antitrust Economists and Business Professors as Amici Curiae in Support of Appellant and Reversal (Feb. 24, 2017)

Brief of Appellees The United States of America and Plaintiff States Public Copy—Sealed Material Deleted (Mar. 13, 2017)

Amicus Curiae Brief of American Hospital Association in Support of Appellees and Affirmance (Mar. 16, 2017)

Brief for The American Medical Association and The Medical Society of the District of Columbia As Amici Curiae in Support of Appellees and Affirmance (Mar. 17, 2017)

Brief for Amici Curiae American Antitrust Institute, Consumers Union, Consumer Action, Consumer Federation of America, United States Public Interest Research Group, Universal Health Care Foundation of Connecticut, Sergeants Benevolent Association, Connecticut Citizen Action Group, and California Reinvestment Coalition in Support of Plaintiffs-Appellees (Mar. 17, 2017)

Brief of Professors As Amici Curiae in Support of Appellees and Affirmance (Mar. 17, 2017)

Reply Brief dor Defendant-Appellant Anthem, Inc..(Mar. 20, 2017)

Oral argument (Mar. 24, 2017) (before Judges Rogers, Kavanaugh and Millett)

Opinion, United States v. Anthem, Inc., No. 17-5024 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 28, 2017) (affirming grant of permanent injunction)

± American Medical Ass'n, Letter to Brent Snyder, Acting Ass't Att'y Gen., Antitrust Div., U.S. Dep't of Justice, re The Anthem-CIGNA Merger: A Deal That Should Never Close (Feb. 28, 2017)

 

Post-trial corporate developments

Anthem, Inc., Form 8-K (filed Jan. 19, 2017) (reporting that it delivered written notice to Cigna that Anthem has elected to extend the “Termination Date” (as defined in the Merger Agreement) through and including April 30, 2017)

Anthem, Inc., Press Release, Anthem Responds to U.S. District Court’s Decision on Acquisition of Cigna (Feb. 9, 2017)

Cigna Corporation, News Release, Cigna Terminates Merger Agreement with Anthem (Feb. 14, 2017)

Complaint, Cigna Corp. v. Anthem Inc., C.A. No. 2017-0109-JTL (Del. Ch. filed Feb. 17, 2017) (seeking payment of $1.85 billion antitrust reverse termination fee and damages for breach of contract)

Anthem, Inc., News Release, Anthem Files Suit Against Cigna Seeking a Temporary Restraining Order to Enjoin Cigna from Terminating the Merger Agreement, Specific Performance Compelling Cigna to Comply with the Merger Agreement and Damages (Feb. 15, 2017)

Complaint, Anthem, Inc. v. Cigna Corp., No. 2017-0114 (Del. Ch. filed Feb. 17, 2017) (seeking to enjoin Cigna's putative termination of the merger agreement)

Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Feb. 14, 2017)

Order Granting Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Feb. 15, 2017) (restraining Cigna from terminating merger agreement)

Teleconference Plaintiff's Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and the Court's Ruling (Feb. 15, 2017)

 

Commentary

± American Antitrust Institute, Letter to William J. Baer, Ass't Atty. Gen., Antitrust Div., U.S. Dep't of Justice, re Antitrust Review of the Aetna-Humana and Anthem-Cigna Mergers (Jan. 11, 2016)

± Thomas Greaney, The Anthem/Cigna Merger Trial: Sifting through the Evidence, HealthAffairsBlog.com (Dec. 28, 2016)

Aetna/Humana (DOJ 2016)

Background

Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of July 2, 2015 among Aetna Inc., Echo Merger Sub, Inc., Echo Merger Sub, LLC and Humana Inc. (July 2, 2015)

D.D.C.

Complaint, United States. v. Aetna, Inc., No. 1:16-cv-01494-JDB (D.D.C. filed July 21, 2016)

Docket sheet (downloaded Jan. 23, 2017)

± Trial exhibits

Plaintiffs' Pretrial Brief (Nov. 23, 2016)

Plaintiffs’ Opening Statement (Dec. 5, 2017)

Plaintiffs' Closing Statement (Dec. 21, 2016)

Plaintiffs’ Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Jan. 1, 2017)

Memorandum Opinion, United States. v. Aetna, Inc., No. 1:16-cv-01494-JDB (D.D.C. Jan. 23, 2017)

Order (Jan. 23, 2017)

± DOJ web site

Penn State Hershey Medical Center/ PinnacleHealth System
(FTC 2016)

Section 13(b) proceeding

Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, FTC v. Penn State Hershey Med. Ctr., No. 1:15-CV-2362 (M.D. Pa. filed Dec. 9, 2015) (FTC news release)

Docket sheet (downloaded May 19, 2016)

Joint Motion for Entry of a Stipulated Temporary Restraining Order (Dec. 9, 2015)

Order (Dec. 9, 2015) (entering stipulated TRO)

Defendants’ Answers and Defenses (Jan. 11, 2016)

Protective Order Governing Confidential Material (Jan. 25, 2016)

Briefs filed under seal

Memorandum Opinion and Order, FTC v. Penn State Hershey Med. Ctr., No. 1:15-CV-2362 (M.D. Pa. May 9, 2016) (reported at 2016 WL 2622372)

Notice of Appeal (May 10, 2016)

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal (May 10, 2016)

Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal (May 10, 2016)

Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for an Injunction Pending Appeal (May 12, 2016)

Order (May 12, 2016) (extending TRO)

Letter dated May 12, 2016, to Judge Jones re filing of emergency motion in Third Circuit (May 12, 2016)

Appeal to the Third Circuit

FTC v. Penn State Hershey Med. Ctr., No. 16-2365 (3d Cir. docketed May 11, 2016)

Docket sheet (downloaded Oct. 23, 2016)

Emergency Motion for an Injunction Pending Appeal and to Expedite Appeal (May 12, 2016)

Supplemental Motion to Expedite Appeal (May 13, 2016)

Appellees’ Opposition to Emergency Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal (May 18, 2016)

Appellees’ Response to Appellants’ Motion To Expedite Appeal And Proposed Briefing Schedule (May 18, 2016)

Reply of the Federal Trade Commission and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in Support of their Emergency Motion for an Injunction Pending Appeal (May 19, 2016)

Order (May 24, 2016) (granting motion for an injunction pending appeal)

Brief of the Federal Trade Commission and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (June 1, 2016)

Brief of the States of Idaho, Washington, California, Connecticut, Iowa, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, and Oregon As Amicus Curiae in Support of the Appellants (June 8, 2016)

Consent Brief of Amici Curiae Economics Professors in Support of Plaintiffs/Appellants Urging Reversal (June 8, 2016)

Amicus Curiae Brief of the Association of Independent Doctors (June 8, 2016)

Brief of Appellees Penn State Hershey Medical Center and PinnacleHealth System (June 13, 2016)

Reply Brief of the Federal Trade Commission and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (June 17, 2016)

± Argued (July 26, 2016)

Opinion, FTC v. Penn State Hershey Med. Ctr., No. 16-2365 (3d Cir. Sept. 27, 2016)

 

Administrative proceeding

Complaint, In re Penn State Hershely Med. Ctr., No. 9368 (F.T.C. issued Dec. 7, 2015; redacted version filed Dec. 14, 2015)

± FTC docket sheet

Protective Order Governing Discovery Material (Dec. 8, 2015)

Respondents' answers and Defenses (Jan. 4, 2016)

Scheduling Order (Jan. 13, 2016)

Joint Motion to Amend Scheduling Order (Apr. 22, 2016)

Order Granting Joint Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order and Revised Scheduling Order (Apr. 25, 2016)

Joint Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order (May 4, 2016)

Order Granting Second Joint Motion to Amend tThe Scheduling Order, and Second Revised Scheduling Order (May 6, 2016)

Joint Expedited Motion for Continuance of Administrative Proceedings (May 4, 2016)

Order Granting Continuance (May 12, 2016) (postponing trial date to June 1, 2016)

Joint Expedited Motion for Continuancee of the Administrative Hearing (May 27, 20016)

Order Granting Continuance (June 10, 2016) (postpoing trial date to 21 days after the Seventh Circuit "renders its judgment on the Commission's appeal)

Third Revised Scheduling Order (June 13, 2016)

Advocate Health Care Network/NorthShore University HealthSystem
(FTC 2015)

Section 13(b) proceeding

Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Pursuant to Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, FTC v. Advocate Health Care Network, No. 1:15-cv-11473 (N.D. Ill. filed Dec. 22, 2015) (FTC news release)

Docket sheet (downloaded Aug. 28, 2016)

Joint Motion for Entry of Stipulated Temporary Restraining Order (Dec. 21, 2015) (so ordered Dec. 22, 2015)

Defendants Advocate Health Care Network and Advocate Health And Hospital Corp.’s Answer to Complaint (Jan. 11, 2016)

Defendant Northshore University Health System’s Answer to Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Jan. 11, 2016)

 

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Feb. 26, 2016)

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Feb. 26, 2016) (redacted version filed Mar. 9, 2016)

Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Mar. 18, 2016) (redacted version filed Mar. 23, 2016)

Amended/Corrected Reply Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Apr. 7, 2016)

 

Memorandum Opinion and Order (Feb. 29, 2016) (regarding protective order)

Memorandum Opinion Order (Mar. 15, 2016) (denying without prejudice plaintiffs' motion for an order allowing the parties’ proposed findings of fact to cite all reliable evidence)

Defendants’ Motion to Seal Defendants’ Motion to Exclude tThe Testimony and Report of Dr. Steven A. Tenn, Ph.D (Apr. 1, 2016)

Defendants’ Memorandum in Support of their Motion to Exclude the Testimony and Report of Steven A. Tenn, Ph.D (Apr. 5, 2016) (redacted)

Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Exclude the Testimony and Report of Dr. Steven A. Tenn, Ph.D. (Apr. 4, 2016) (filed under seal)

Order (Apr. 6, 2016) (denying defendants' motion to exclude Tenn testimony)

Notice of Offer of Judgment (Apr. 4, 2016)

Exhibit A: Letter to the FTC (Apr. 4, 2016)
Exhibit B: Letter to the FTC (Feb. 18, 2016)

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Defendants’ Notice of Offer of Judgment (Apr. 13, 2016)

Order (Apr. 26, 2016) (granting motion to strike Offer of Judgment)

Preliminary Injunction hearing (six days of evidentiary hearings)

April 11
April 12
April 13
April 14
April 15
April 18
April 20
May 6
May 25 (Closing arguments)

Plaintiffs’ Post-Hearing Brief (May 18, 2016; redacted version filed May 24, 2016)

Defendants’ Post-Hearing Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction (May 18, 2016; redacted version filed May 20, 2016)

Plaintiffs’ Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (May 18, 2016; redacted version filed May 31, 2016)

Defendants’ Proposed Findings of Fact aAnd Conclusions of Law (May 18, 2016; redacted version filed May 27, 2016)

Order (June 14, 2016) (denying preliminary injunction)

Memorandum Opinion and Order (June 14, 2016; redacted version filed June 20, 2016)

Notice of Appeal (June 15, 2016)

 

Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal (June 16, 2016)

Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for an Injunction Pending Appeal (June 16, 2016)

Minute Order (June 17, 2016) (granting motion for a preliminary injunction pending appeal)

 

Appeal to the Seventh Circuit

FTC v. Advocate Health Care Network, No. 16-2492 (7th Cir. docketed June 15, 2016)

Docket Sheet No. 16-2492 (downloaded Aug. 28, 2016)

Brief and Required Short Appendix of Appellants Federal Trade Commission and State of Illinois (July 15, 2016)

Brief of the States of Connecticut, Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Washington As Amicus Curiae in Support of the Appellants (July 22, 2016)

Amicus Curiae Brief of the Association of Independent Doctors in Support of Appellants to Reverse the District Court Decision (July 22, 2016)

Amicus Brief Submitted by Thirty-Three Economists in Support of the FTC and State of Illinois and Seeking Reversal of the District Court Ruling (July 22, 2016)

Brief of Appellees (Aug. 1, 2016)

Appellees’ Circuit Rule 30(e) Supplemental Appendix (Aug. 1, 2016)

Brief of the American Hospital Association As Amicus Curiae in Support of Appellees and Affirmance (Aug. 8, 2016)

Reply Brief of Appellants Federal Trade Commission and State of Illinois (Aug. 12, 2016)

Argued (Aug. 19, 2016) (± audio recording)

Post-Argument letter by Appellee NorthShore University HealthSystem (Aug. 22, 2016) (to a point raised by appellants only in their reply brief and during rebuttal argument (Aug. 22, 2016)

Response by Appellants FTC and State of Illinois (Aug. 24, 2016)

 

Administrative proceeding

Complaint, In re Advocate Health Care Network, No. 9369 (issued Dec. 17, 2015)

Protective Order Governing Discovery Material (Jan. 6, 2016)

Answer (Jan. 6, 2016)

Scheduling Order (Jan. 20, 2016)

Respondents’ Motion to Stay the Administrative Hearing (Feb. 5, 2016)

Complaint Counsel’s Opposition to Respondents’ Motion to Stay (Feb. 17, 2016)

Respondents’ Motion for Leave to File a Reply in Support of Respondents’ Motion to Stay the Administrative Hearing (Feb. 24, 2016)

Order Denying Motion to Stay the Administrative Hearing (Mar. 18, 2016)

Order Granting Joint Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order and Revised Scheduling Order (Apr. 27, 2016)

Joint Expedited Motion for a 22-Day Stay of Administrative Proceedings (Apr. 27, 2016)

Order Granting Continuance (May 6, 2016)

Joint Expedited Motion for Continuance of Administrative Proceedings (May 27, 2016)

Order Granting Continuance (June 2, 2016)

 

Staples/Office Depot
(FTC 2015)

Deal

Staples, Inc.& Office Depot, Inc., Press Release, Staples, Inc. Announces Acquisition of Office Depot, Inc. (Feb. 4, 2015)

Staples, Inc., Investor Presentation (Feb. 4, 2015)

Staples, Inc., Investors Call (transcript) (Feb. 4, 2015)

Section 13(b) proceeding

Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Pursuant to Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, FTC v. Staples, Inc., No. 1:15-cv-02115-EGS (D.D.C. filed Dec. 8, 2015; public version filed Dec. 9, 2015)

Fed. Trade Comm’s, News Release,  FTC Challenges Proposed Merger of Staples, Inc. and Office Depot, Inc. (Dec. 7, 2015)

Docket sheet (downloaded Aug. 28, 2016)

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (Dec. 8, 2015) (re TRO)

Temporary Restraining Order (Dec. 8, 2015)

Plaintifrs Motion and Statement of Points and Authorities in Support of Request for Preliminary Injunction (Dec. 8, 2015)

[Proposed] Preliminary Injunction Order (Dec. 8, 2015)

Defendant Staples, Inc’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Dec. 22, 2015)

Defendant Office Depot, Inc.’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Dec. 22, 2015)

Memorandum Opinion (Jan. 21, 2016) (denying defendants' motion to compel production of factual information collected by plaintiffs from third parties during the course of the 2013 investigation of the Office Depot-Office Max merger and the 2015 investigation of the Staples-Office Depot merger.)

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Feb. 19, 2016)

Defendants’ Brief in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Mar. 15, 2016; redacted version filed Mar. 16, 2016)

Reply Memorandum in Further Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Mar. 17, 2016; redacted version filed Mar. 18, 2016)

Evidentiary hearing: March 21, 2016 to April 5, 2016

15 million pages of documents produced
70 depositions
5 expert reports
10 live witnesses
4000 exhibits admitted into evidence
At the close of the FTC's case in chief, the defendants elected not to present any witnesses

Plaintiffs’ Notice of Order of Witnesses (Mar. 17, 2016)

Defendants’ Notice of Order of Witnesses (Mar. 31, 2016)

FTC Deport Closing Presentation (Apr. 19, 2016; redacted version filed Apr. 25, 2016)

Staples Closing Presentation (Apr. 5, 2016; redacted version filed Apr. 24, 2016)

See Staples, Press Release, Staples and Office Depot to Sell Commercial Contracts and Assets to Essendant (Feb. 26, 2016)

Order (May 10, 2016) (granting preliminary injunction)

Memorandum Opinion (May 10, 2016; redacted version May 17, 2016) (reported at 190 F. Supp. 3d 100)

 

(Contested) Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs under Section 16 of the Clayton Act (May 24, 2016)

Memorandum in Support of Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs under Section 16 of the Clayton Act (May 24, 2016)

Defendants’ Brief in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (June 10, 2016)

Plaintiffs' Reply to Defendants' Brief in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Attort'ieys' Fees and Costs (June 20, 2016)

Defendants’ Surreply in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (June 27, 2016)

 

Administrative proceedings

In re Staples, Inc., No. 9367 (FTC issued Dec. 7, 2015) (FTC news release)

Staples, Inc., Press Release, Staples and Office Depot to Contest FTC’s Attempt to Block Office Depot Acquisition (Dec. 7, 2015)

Protective Order Governing Discovery Material (Dec. 8, 2015)

Order Designating Administrative Law Judge (Dec. 8, 2015)

Respondent Staples, Inc’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint (Dec. 23, 2015)

Answer and Defenses of Respondent Office Depot, Inc. (Dec. 23, 2015)

Scheduling Order (Jan. 4, 2016)

Transcript of Scheduling Conference (Jan. 4, 2016)

Administrative trial scheduled to start on May 31, 2016

Joint Motion to Dismiss Complaint (May 18, 2016)

Order Dismissing Complaint (May 18, 2016) (FTC News Release (May 19, 2016))

± FTC web page

 

Termination of transaction

Staples, Inc., News Release, Staples and Office Depot to Terminate Merger Agreement (May 10, 2016)

Office Depot, Inc., News Release, Office Depot Responds to District Court’s Ruling on Merger with Staples (May 10, 2016)

Analysis

± Michael J. de la Merced & David Gelles, Staples and Office Depot Say a Merger Will Keep Them Competitive, N.Y. Times DealB%, Feb. 4, 2015

± Randy M. Stutz, American Antitrust Institute, The Proposed Merger of Staples and Office Depot: Lessons from History and New Competitive Concerns (July 22, 2015)

± Drew FitzGerald & Brent Kendall, FTC Intensifies Antitrust Review of Staples-Office Depot Merger, Wall St. J., Sept. 8, 2015.

American Postal Workers Union, Bad for Business: Why the Staples/Office Depot Merger-to-Monopoly Should Be Blocked, Objections to the Merger—Part 2 (Oct. 2015)

1997 FTC challenge

Staples tried to acquire Office Depot in 1997. The FTC obtained a preliminary injunction blocking the deal and the parties terminated the contract.

2013 Office Max-Office Depot merger

Fed. Trade Comm'n, Statement Concerning the Proposed Merger of Office Depot, Inc. and OfficeMax, Inc., FTC File No. 131-0104 (Nov. 1, 2013).

United Continental/Delta
(DOJ 2015)

Verified Complaint, United States v. United Continental Holdings, Inc., 2:15-cv-07992-WHW-CLW (D.N.J. Nov. 10, 2015)

Docket sheet (downloaded Apr. 14, 2016)

Notice of Motion to Dismiss Filed by United Continental Holdings, Inc. (Jan. 12, 2016)

Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendant United Continental Holdings, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Claims Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) (Jan. 12, 2016)

United States of America’s Opposition to Defendant United Continental Holdings, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss (Feb. 12, 2016)

Notice of Motion to Dismiss Filed by Defendant Delta Air Lines, Inc. (Jan. 12, 2016)

Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendant Delta Air Lines Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Claims Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (Jan. 12, 2016)

United States of America’s Opposition to Defendant Delta Air Lines, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss (Feb. 12, 2016)

United States of America’s Notice of Agency Action (Apr. 1, 2016)

Exhibit A: FAA, Change of Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) Designation

Stipulation of Dismissal (Apr. 6, 2016)

Exhibit: Letter dated April 5, 2016, from Kent A. Gardiner, to Eric Mahr, Department of Justice, re termination of slot lease agreement (Apr. 5, 2016)

± DOJ web page

Electrolux/GE
(DOJ 2015)

AB Electrolux, Press Release, Electrox to Acquire GE Appliances (Sept. 8, 2014)

AB Electrolux, Electrolux to Acquire GE Appliances (Sept. 8, 2014) (investor presentation)

 

± Chad Bray, In 2nd Try, Electrolux Reaches Deal to Buy G.E. Appliances Unit, for $3.3 Billion, N.Y. Times DealBook, Sept. 8, 2014

 

Complaint, United States v. AB Electrolux, No. 1:15-cv-01039 (D.D.C. filed July 1, 2015)

Docket sheet (downloaded Aug. 28, 2016) (case terminated Jan. 1, 2016)

Stipulation Regarding Scheduling and Case Management and [Proposed] Trial Setting and Case-Management Order (July 16, 2015) (so ordered July 21, 2015)

Stipulated Protective Order Regarding Confidentiality (July 16, 2015) (so ordered July 21, 2015)

Defendants AB Electrolux and Electrolux North America, Inc’s Answer and Defenses tTo Plaintiff’s Complaint (July 24, 2015)

Defendant General Electric Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff’s Complaint (July 24, 2015)

Intervenor Samsung Electronics America, Inc.’s Motion to Modify Protective Order (Aug. 21, 2015)

Defendants’ Motion to Compel Samsung Electronics America, Inc., to Produce All Documents Responsive to their Subpoena Duces Tecum (Aug. 28, 2015)

Exhibit A; Letter and subpoena
Exhibit B: Letter of objections

Intervenor Samsung Electronics America, Inc.’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Compel (Sept. 4, 2015)

Reply in Support of Defendants’ Motion tTo Compel Samsung Electronics America, Inc., to Produce All Documents Responsive to their Subpoena Duces Tecum (Sept. 7, 2015)

Exhibit E: Email string (ECF No. 98-5)

MINUTE ORDER granting in part and denying in part Defendants' Motion to Compel Samsung Electronics America, Inc. to Produce All Documents Responsive to their Subpoena Duces Tecum. In accordance with the compromise proposal made by Samsung (e-mail exchange, ECF No. 98-5), and finding the deficiencies argued by Defendants persuasive (reply brief, ECF No. 100 at 9), Samsung shall produce the following forthwith: (1) invoicing and returns data provided to DOJ since the production to DOJ; (2) profit and loss data provided to DOJ since the production to DOJ; (3) the MAP/MSRP data provided to DOJ since the production to DOJ; (4) Samsungs contract channel bids for the last two years; (5) Meeting competition documents for the last two years if they are found in a meeting competition database; (6) Documents sufficient to identify Samsungs products; (7) Contracts with Samsungs top ten customers for the past two years (subject to contractual notice requirements); (8) Samsungs current organization chart for the products at issue; (9) Trade show panel presentations from the last two years, if any; (10) Contract manufacturing contracts, if any, from the last two years; (11) Documents sufficient to identify the location of Samsung facilities; (12) A list of Samsungs services; (13) Contracts with Samsungs top ten services (subject to contractual notice requirements); (14) Strategic plans and other competition analyses from 2013-2018; (15) All communications about the challenged acquisition. Where relevant, production ordered above shall include all appliances listed in the subpoena, not only cooking appliances. Samsung shall immediately begin a rolling production, and must comply with the following deadlines: all relevant documents in categories (1) - (7) shall be produced no later than September 11, 2015; all relevant documents in categories (8) - (15) shall be produced no later than September 18, 2015. Samsung shall bear the costs of production now, but may move for a cost-shifting order once production is complete. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on September 8, 2015

Amended Scheduling Order (Sept. 3, 2015)

Trial scheduled to begin on November 9, 2015

Joint Status Report for October 21 Status Conference (Oct. 20, 2015)

Joint Pretrial Statement (Oct. 23, 2015)

Exhibit A. Schedule of Witnesses

United States’ Pretrial Memorandum (Oct. 26, 2015; redacted version filed Dec. 10, 2015)

Defendants’ Pre-Trial Brief (Oct. 26, 2015; redacted version filed Dec. 10, 2015)

United States’ Motion to Preclude Defendants from Adding Out-Of-Time Expert Opinions or Bases (Oct. 30, 2015)

Defendants’ Response to Plaintiff’s Motion to Preclude Defendants from Adding Out-Of-Time Expert Opinions or Bases (Nov. 1, 2015)

MINUTE ORDER granting the Government'sMotion to Preclude Defendants From Adding Out-of-Time Expert Opinion or Bases. Defendants' expert Mr. Orszag completed new analyses, including 90 new computer programs supported by 27 gigabytes of back-up material, after expert rebuttal reports and depositions were complete. The new material produced by Mr. Orszag goes beyond an "elaboration" of his expert report and thus shall be precluded from trial. (Nov. 3, 2015)

MINUTE ORDER. Pursuant to the telephonic hearing held November 3, 2015 at 4:00 p.m., the Court's prior Minute Order precluding all post-rebuttal work done by Defendants' expert, Mr. Orszag, is hereby VACATED. On the basis that post-rebuttal work by both parties' experts will aid the Court in its consideration of this case, the following schedule for post-rebuttal reports shall be followed: (1) the Government's expert, Professor Whinston, shall submit his report no later than 12:00 p.m. Saturday, November 7, 2015; (2) Defendants' expert, Mr. Orszag, shall submit his report no later than 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, November 11, 2015. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on November 3, 2015. (lcegs4) (Entered: 11/03/2015)

Draft Final Pre-Trial Order (Nov. 1, 2015)

Notice of Defendants’ Proposed Edits to Pretrial Order (Nov. 2, 2015)

Appendix A.

Joint Amended Pretrial Statement (Nov. 2, 2015)

Exhibit A. Schedule of Witnesses

Final Pre-Trial Order (Nov. 3, 2015)

Joint Status Report for November 6 Status Hearing (Nov. 5, 2015)

Trial begins (Nov. 9, 2015)

United States' Opening Statement

Demonstrative/Summary Exhibit Used with Direct Testimony of Michael Whinston

Defendants’ Motion to Recall Keith McLoughlin (Nov. 21, 2015)

[Proposed] Order Granting Defendants’ Motion to Recall Keith McLoughlin (Nov. 21, 2015)

Exhibit A: Declaration of Keith R. McLoughlin

United States’ Response to Defendants’ Motion to Recall Keith McLoughlin (Nov. 21, 2015)

Trial continuing when GE terminated purchase agreement (Dec. 7, 2015)

Notice Termination of Stock And Asset Purchase Agreement (Dec. 7, 2015)

General Electric, GE Statement on Appliances Business (Dec. 7, 2015)
AB Elextrolux, Press Release, Acquisition of GE Appliances Not to Be Completed (Dec. 7, 2015)
U.S. Dep't of Justice, antitrust Div., Press Release, Electrolux and General Electric Abandon Anticompetitive Appliance Transaction After Four-Week Trial (Dec. 7, 2015)

± Chad Bray, General Electric Calls Off Sale of Appliance Unit to Electrolux, NYTimes.com DealBook (Dec. 7, 2015)
± Andrew Marc Noel, Electrolux Drops After GE Pulls $3.3 Billion Appliance Deal, BloombergBusiness.com (Dec. 7, 2015)
± Ted Mann & Jens Hansegard, GE Terminates Sale of Appliances Business to Electrolux, Wall St. J. (Dec. 7, 2015)

 

Stipulation of Dismissal (Dec. 10, 2015)

± DOJ web page

Sale to Haier

± GE, Press Release, GE Agrees to Sell Appliances Business to Haier for $5.4B (Dec. 15, 2016)
± GE, Press Release, GE Completes Sale of Appliances Business to Haier (June 6, 2016)

± Laurie Burkitt, Joann S. Lublin & Dana Mattioli, China’s Haier to Buy GE Appliance Business for $5.4 Billion, Wall St. J. (Jan. 15, 2016)

 

Steris/Synergy Health
(FTC 2015)

Section 13(b) proceeding

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, FTC v. Steris Corp., No. 1:15-cv-01080-DAP (N.D. Ohio filed May 29, 2015) (redacted version filed June 4, 2015)

Docket sheet (downloaded Sept. 24, 2015)

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (May 29, 2015; redacted version filed June 4, 2015)

Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 8, 2015; redacted version filed Aug. 11, 2015)

Reply Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 14, 1015; redacted version filed Aug. 18, 2015)

Defendant Steris Corporation’s Answer to Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission’s Complaint (June 12, 2015)

Answer of Defendant Synergy Health PLC (June 12, 2015)

Protective Order (June 23, 2015)

Hearing

August 17
August 18
August 19

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission’s Post-Hearing Brief (Aug. 28, 2015)

Defendants’ Post-Hearing Brief on Synergy Non-Entry (Aug. 28, 2015)

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission’s Post-Hearing Response Brief (Sept. 4, 2015)

Defendants’ Post-Hearing Response Brief (Sept. 4, 2015)

Opinion and Order (Sept. 24, 2015) (denying motion for preliminary injunction) (reported at 2015 WL 5657294)

Judgment Entry (Sept. 24, 2015)

 

FTC administrative proceeding

Administrative Complaint (May 29, 2015) (FTC press release)

± FTC docket sheet

Order Designating Administrative Law Judge (May 29, 2015)

Protective Order Governing Discovery Material (May 29, 2015)

Answer of Respondent Steris Corporation (June 18, 2015)

Answer and Defenses of Respondent Synergy Health PLC (June 22, 2015)

Scheduling Order (June 30, 2015)

Respondents’ Motion to the Commission to Withdraw Matter from Adjudication (Oct. 1, 2015)

Order Withdrawing Matter from Adjudication Pursuant to Rule 3.26(c) of the Commission Rules of Practice (Oct. 7, 2015)

Order Returning Matter to Adjudication and Dismissing Complaint (Oct. 30, 2015) (FTC news release)

Statement of the Commission (Oct. 30, 2015)

Sysco/US Foods
(FTC 2015)

See here for materials (in Unit 15. Merger Antitrust Risk Assessment and Contractual Risk Allocation)

Albertsons/Safeway
(State 2015)

Complaint, Washington v. Cerberus Institutional Partners V, L.P., No. 2:15-cv-00147 (W.D. Wash. filed Jan. 30, 2015)

Docket sheet (downloaded Aug. 28, 2016)

Agreed Motion for Endorsement of Consent Decree (Jan. 30, 2015)

[Proposed] Consent Decree (Jan. 30, 2015)

Order Entering Consent Decree (Feb. 3, 2015)

Minute Order Statistically Closing Case (Feb. 3, 2015)

Pacific Seafood Group (Broadman)
(private 2015)

District court

Complaint, Boardman v. Pacific Seafood Group, No. 1:15-cv-00108-PA (D. Or. filed Jan. 22, 2015)

Docket sheet (downloaded Aug. 28, 2016)

See Whaley Pacific Seafood Group, No.10-3057(D. Or. filed June 22, 2010) (prior settled class action) (see here for case materials)

Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Jan. 28, 2015)

Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Jan. 28, 2015)

Defendants’ Memorandmum in Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Jan. 28, 2015)

Defendants’ Additional Memorandum in Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Feb. 13, 2015)

Plaintiffs' Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Feb. 23, 2015)

Second Amended Complaint (Feb. 26, 2015)

Order (Mar. 6, 2015) (granting preliminary injunction)

Notice of Appeal (Apr. 6, 2015)

Order (Aug. 6, 2015) (staying action pending appeal)

Interlocutory appeal to the Ninth Circuit

Docket sheet No 15-35257(downloaded Aug. 28, 2016)

Appellants’ Opening Brief (Aug. 17, 2015)

Plaintiffs-Appellees’ Answering Brief (Sept. 9, 2015)

Appellants’ Reply Brief (Sept. 16, 2015)

Opinion, Boardman v. Pacific Seafood Group, No 15-35257 (9th Cir. May 3, 2016) (reported at 822 F.3d 1011)

Mandate (July 25, 2016)

Verso Paper/Bucksport mill
(Private 2014)

First Amended Complaint, International Ass'n of Machinists and Aerospace Workers v. Verso Paper Corp., No. 1:14-cv-00530-JAW (D. Me. filed Dec. 22, 2014) (original filed Dece. 15, 2014)

Docket sheet (downloaded Aug. 13, 2015)

Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and a Preliminary Injunction Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 65 (Dec. 15, 2014)

Defedants Verso Paper Corp. and Verso Paper LLC's Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and a Preliminary Injunction (Jan. 2, 2015)

Memorandum of AIM Development (USA) LLC in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Jan. 2, 2015)

Plaintiffs’ Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction under the Antirust Laws (Jan. 8, 2015)

Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction and Addendum (Jan. 20, 2015)

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attachment and Trustee’s Process and Memorandum of Law in Support (Dec. 15, 2014)

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Expedited Declaratory Judgment and Request for Preliminary and Permanent Injunction (Dec. 15, 2014)

Order Dismissing Plaintiffs’ Motion for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief; and Dismissing Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attachment and Trustee Process (Jan. 6, 2015)

Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal of Counts 5 through 8 (State Antitrust Claims) of Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (Feb. 13, 2015)

Defendants Verso Paper Corp. and Verso Paper LLC’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (Mar. 2, 2015)

Motion of AIM Development (USA) LLC to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint with Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Mar. 2, 2015)

Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Response in Opposition to Defendants’ Separate Motions tTo Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) (Mar. 23, 2015)

Defendants Verso Paper Corp. and Verso Paper LLC’s Reply in Support of Defendants’ Motion tTo Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (Apr. 6, 2015)

Reply Memorandum of AIM Development (USA) LLC in Support of Its Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (Apr. 6, 2015)

 

Louisiana-Pacific/Ainsworth
(DOJ 2014)

U.S. Dep't of Justice, Antitrust Div., Press Release, Louisiana-Pacific Corp. Abandons its Proposed Acquisition of Ainsworth Lumber Co. Ltd. (May 14, 2014)

Jostens/American Achievement
(FTC 2014)

Fed. Trade Comm'n, News Release, Statement of FTC Bureau of Competition Director Deborah Feinstein on Jostens’ Decision to Drop its Proposed Acquisition of American Achievement Corp. (Apr. 17, 2014)

Adminstrative Complaint, In re Visant Corp., No. 9362 (F.T.C. issed apr. 17, 2014)

/USAir/American
(DOJ/states 2013)

D.D.C.

Complaint, United States v. US Airways Group, Inc., No. 1:13-cv-01236 (D.D.C. filed Aug. 13, 2013) (DOJ news release)

Amended Complaint, United States v. US Airways Group, Inc., No. 1:13-cv-01236 (D.D.C. filed Sept. 5, 2013)

Docket sheet (downloaded Jan. 16, 2014)

[Defendants'] Motion to Set Trial Date (Aug. 22, 2013)

Order (Aug. 23, 2013) (setting briefing schedule on trial date)

Motion of Allied Pilots Association, Association of Professional Flight Attendants, Association of Flight Attendants-CWA and Transport Workers Union of America to File Amicus Curiae Brief in Support Defendant’s Motion to Set Trial Date [Ecf No. 11] (Aug. 23, 2013)

Exhibit A: [Proposed} Brief Amici Curiae of Allied Pilots Association, Association of Professional Flight Attendants, The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA and Transport Workers Union of America in Support of Defendant’s Motion to Set Trial Date (Aug. 23, 2013)

Memorandum of the United States and Plaintiff States in Opposition to Defendants’ Proposed Scheduling Order (Aug. 27, 2013)

Reply in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Set Trial Date (Aug. 28, 2013)

Order (Aug. 30, 2013) (setting trial date for Nov. 25, 2013)

Order (Aug. 29, 2013) (re issues to be addressed at pretrial hearing)

Stipulated Protective Order Concerning Confidentiality (Aug. 30, 2013)

Scheduling and Case Management Order (Sept. 4, 2013)

Amended Complaint (Sept. 5, 2013)

Defendant US Airways Group, Inc.’s Answer to Amended Complaint (Sept. 10, 2013)

Notice of Submission to Special Master of Defendants’ Motion to Compel Production of Factual Materials and Information Regarding DOJ’s Approvals of Four Prior Airline Mergers (Sept. 20, 2013)

Notice of Submission to Special Master of Plaintiffs Response to Defendants’ Motion to Compel Production of Factual Materials and Information Regarding DOJ's Approvals of Four Prior Airline Mergers (Sept. 26, 2013).

Exhibit 1: Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Compel Production of Internal Analyses of Prior Airline Mergers (Sept. 26, 2013)

Notice of Submission to Special Master of Defendants’ Reply in Support of Motion to Compel Production of Factual Materials and Information Regarding DOJ's Approvals of Four Prior Airline Mergers (Sept. 29, 2013)

Exhibit 1: Defendants’ Reply in Support of Motion to Compel Production of Factual Materials and Information Regarding DOJ's Approvals of Four Prior Airline Mergers

Report and Recommendation #1 of the Special Master (Oct. 10, 2013) (recommending that, although defendants had established the relevance of their requests, the various privileges asserted by plaintiffs protect almost all of the requested material from disclosure)

[Proposed] Order Adopting Special Master Report and Recommendation #1

Notice of Submission to Special Master of Defendants’ Motion to Compel Production of Relevant Facts Obtained from Third-Party Interviews (Sept. 24, 2013)

Exhibit 1: Defendants’ Motion to Compel Production of Relevant Facts Obtained from Third-Party Interviews
Exhibit 2: Second Declaration of Steven G. Bradbury
Exhibit 3: [Proposed] Order on Defendants’ Motion to Compel Relevant Facts Obtained from Third-Party Interviews

Notice of Submission to Special Master of Plaintiffs Response to Defendants’ Motion to Compel Production of Interview-Related Work Product (Sept. 26, 2013)

Exhibit 1: Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Compel Production of Interview-Related Work Product
Exhibit 2: Letter to Judge Cote dated Sept. 10, 2012, in United States v. apple, Inc. et al., 12-cv-02826 (DLC)

Notice of Submission to Special Master of Defendants’ Reply in Support of Motion to Compel Relevant Facts Obtained from Third-Party Interviews (Sept. 27, 2013)

Exhibit 1: Defendants’ Reply in Support of Motion to Compel Relevant Facts Obtained from Third-Party Interviews

Special Master Report and Recommendation #2 (Oct. 10, 2013) (recommending denial of motion)

[Proposed] Order Adopting Special Master Report and Recommendation #2

Settlement Agreement with Texas Attorney General (Sept. 30, 2013)

Plaintiff State of Texas’s Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss its Claims with Prejudice (Oct. 2, 2013)

Exhibit 1: Proposed] Order Granting Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss Claims of Plaintiff State of Texas

Order (Oct. 7, 2013) (dismissing Texas' claims with prejudice)

Joint Report in Advance of Status Conference (Sept. 30, 2013)

Motion for a Stay of Litigation in Light of Lapse of Appropriations (Oct. 1, 2013)

Order (Oct. 1, 2013) (denying stay)

Joint Report in Advance of Status Conference (Oct. 28, 2013) (noting, among other things, agreement on a mediator)

Exhibit One: Discovery Status

Trial Procedures Order (Oct. 30, 2013)

Joint Stipulation of the Plaintiff States and Defendants Requesting Entry of Supplemental Stipulated Order (Nov. 12, 2013)

[Proposed] Supplemental Stipulated Order (signed Nov. 12, 2013)

Order (Nov. 13, 2013) (staying all trial proceedings)

DOJ consent settlement

Proposed Final Judgment (Nov. 12, 2013) (DOJ news release)

U.S. Dep't of Justice, Antitrust Div., Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by Assistant Attorney General Bill Baer at the Conference Call Regarding rhe Justice Department’s Proposed Settlement with US Airways and American Airlines (Nov. 12, 2013)

Asset Preservation Order and Stipulation (Nov. 12, 2013) (signed Nov. 12, 2013)

Competitive Impact Statement (Nov. 12, 2013)

United States' Explanation of Consent Decree Procedures (Nov. 12, 2013)

Order (Nov. 20, 2013) (setting out procedures for compliance with the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act (Tunney Act))

Federal Register notice (Nov. 27, 2013)

American Airlines Group, Inc.’s Report of Compliance with Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act Requirements (Dec. 9, 2013)

Supplemental Certificate Pursuant to LCVRr 7.1 of the Local Rules and Rule 7.1 (Dec. 13, 2013) (noting that US Airways became a wholly-owned subsidiary of American Airlines Group Inc. on Dec. 9, 2013)

Selected public comments:

American Antitrust Institute (Feb. 7, 2014)

± DOJ publci comments page

Response of Plaintiff United States to Public Comments on the Proposed Final Judgment (Mar. 10, 2014)

[Proposed] Brief of the American Antitrust Institute as Amicus Curiae to Reply to the Response of Plaintiff United States to Public Comments on the Proposed Final Judgment (Apr. 1, 2014)

American Airlines Group, Inc.’s Amended Report and Certification of Compliance with Section 2(g) of Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act (Mar. 10, 2014)

Plaintiff United States of America's Motion and Memorandum for Entry of the Proposed Final Judgment (Mar. 13, 2014)

Certificate of Compliance with Provisions of the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act (Mar. 13, 2014)

Memorandum Opinion (Apr. 25, 2014)

Final Judgment (Apr. 25, 2014)

 

Bankruptcy Court S.D.N.Y.

Statement of the United States of America (Aug. 23, 2013)

Debtors’ Memorandum of Law Regarding Impact of Department of Justice Action on Entry of Order Confirming Debtors’ Third Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan (Aug. 23, 2013)

Commentary

± Justin Elliott, The American Way, ProPublica.org (Oct. 11, 2016) (also hyperlinking to hundreds of documents relevant to the case)

± Steven Pearlstein, Why the Justice Department blocked the American-US Airways merger, NYTimes.com Wonkblog (Aug. 15, 2013).

± Wall St. J., Eric Holder's Antitrust Bust: Justice retreats on an American Airlines-US Air merger to avoid losing in court (Nov. 13, 2013).

± Jack Nicas, Airline Merger Sets Up Land Grab at Major Airports, Wall St. J. (Nov. 13, 2013).

± Matthew Yglesias, Winners and Losers in American–US Airways Merger Settlement, Slate.com (Nov. 13, 2013).

± James B. Stewart, Baffling About-Face in American-US Airways Merger, N.Y. Times (Nov. 15, 2013).

 

± DOJ web site

USAir/American
(private 2013)

Bankruptcy Court S.D.N.Y.

Complaint for Injunctive Relief Against Violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act, In re AMR Corp. (Fjord v. AMR Corp.), Ch. 11 No. 11-15463-shl (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. filed Aug. 6, 2013)

Notice of Motion and Motion to Withdraw Reference under 28 U.S.C. § 157(d) (Aug. 27, 2013)

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion to Withdraw Reference under 28 U.S.C. § 157(d)

S.D.N.Y.

Docket sheet (downloaded Nov. 16, 2013)

Order (Aug. 29, 2013) (order respondents to reply to motion to withdraw the bankruptcy reference by Sept. 13, 2013)

Order (Sept. 13, 2013) (plaintiffs having withdraw motion to withdraw, terminating motion)

Ardagh/Saint-Gobain
(FTC 2013)

Section 13(b) proceeding

Complaint for Preliminary Injunction Pursuant to Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act,, FTC v. Ardagh Group S.A., No. 1:13-CV-01021 (D.D.C. filed July 3, 2013) (redacted version filed July 17, 2013)

Docket sheet (downloaded Apr. 23, 2014)

Plaintiff's Motion and Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of its Request for a Preliminary Injunction and Request for Scheduling Conference (July 3, 2013)

[Proposed] Preliminary Injunction Order (July 3, 2013)

Protective Order (July 9, 2013)

Stipulated Joint Proposed Scheduling Order (July 19, 2013)

Answer and Defenses of Defendant Ardagh Group S.A. (July 26, 2013)

Answer and Affirmative Defenses of Defendants Compagnie de Saint-Gobain, and Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc. (July 26, 2013)

Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Law in Support of its Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 28, 2013) (redacted version Sept. 26, 2013)

Reassignment of Civil Case (Aug. 29, 2013)

Defendants’ Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the Federal Trade Commission’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Sept. 20, 2013)

Notice of Second Amended Stipulated Joint Proposed Scheduling Order (Sept. 24, 2013)

Second Amended Stipulated Joint Proposed Scheduling Order (Sept. 24, 2013) (so ordered Sept. 27, 2013)

Standing Order for Civil Cases (Sept.. 25, 2013)

Plaintiff’s Reply Memorandum of Law in Further Support of its Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Sept. 30, 2013)

Motion for a Stay in Light of United States Government Cessation (Oct. 1, 2013)

[Proposed] Order Staying All Proceedings (Oct. 1, 2013) (granted Oct. 1, 2013)

Notice of Third Amended Stipulated Joint Proposed Scheduling Order (Oct. 21, 2013)

Third Amended Stipulated Joint Proposed Scheduling Order (Oct. 21, 2013) (so ordered Oct. 22, 2013)

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (Nov. 7, 2013) (stipulating to a preliminary injunction) (so ordered Nov. 8, 2013)

± FTC web page for Section 13(b) proceeding

Administrative procceeding

Statement of the Federal Trade Commission in the Matter of Ardagh Group S.A., Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc., and Compagnie de Saint-Gobain (Apr. 11, 2014)

Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Joshua D. Wright (Apr. 11, 2014)

 

AB Inbev/Grupo Modelo
(DOJ 2013)

Complaint, United States v. Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV, 1:13-cv-00127 (D.D.C. filed Jan. 31, 2013) (news release)

Docket sheet (downloaded Nov. 16, 2013) (closed Apr. 9, 2013)

Constellation Brands, Inc.’s and Crown Imports LLC’s Motion to Intervene as Defendants (Feb. 7, 2013)

Statement of Points and Authorities in Support of Constellation Brands, Inc.'s and Crown Imports LLC's Motion to Intervene (Feb. 7, 2013)

Memorandum in Support of Constellation Brands, Inc.’s and Crown Imports LLC's Motion to Intervene (Feb. 8, 2013) (by ABI and Groupo Modelo)

Joint Motion to Stay Proceedings (Feb. 20, 2013)

Joint Motion to Extend the Stay (Mar. 15, 2013)

DOJ consent settlement

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (Apr. 19, 2013)

Proposed Final Judgment (Apr. 19, 2013)

Exhibit A: Stock Purchase Agreement Between Anheuser-Busch InBEV SA/NV and Constellation Brands, Inc. (Apr. 24, 2013) (redacted)
Exhibit B:
Exhibit C:
Exhibit D: Filed under seal
Notice Regarding Filing of Sealed Material (Apr. 19, 2013)

Competitive Impact Statement (Apr. 19, 2013)

United States' Explanation of Consent Decree Procedures (Apr. 19, 2013)

[± Anheuser-Busch InBev, Press Release, Anheuser-Busch InBev Completes Combination with Grupo Modelo (June 4, 2013)]

Unopposed Motion to Approve the Appointment of William E. Berlin as Monitoring Trustee (June 21, 2013)

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Unopposed Motion to Approve the Appointment of William E. Berlin as Monitoring Trustee (June 21, 2013)

Declaration of Michelle R. Seltzer (June 21, 2013)

Exhibit A of Declaration of Michelle R. Seltzer (June 21, 2013)

Order (June 26, 2013) (approving trustee)

United States's Unopposed Motion and Supporting Memorandum for Authorization to Excuse Federal Register Publication of Comments and Attachments (Aug. 1, 2013)

Order (Aug. 5, 2013) (granting motion)

Plaintiff United States’s Response to Public Comments (Sept. 13, 2013)

± Public comments

Plaintiff United States of America's Motion and Memorandum for Entry of the Proposed Final Judgment (Sept. 25, 2013)

[Proposed] Final Judgment (Sept. 25, 2013)

Exhibit A: Stock Purchase Agreement Between Anheuser-Busch InBEV SA/NV and Constellation Brands, Inc.) (Sept. 25, 2013) (redacted public version)
Exhibit B:
Exhibit C:
Exhibit D: Redacted

Certificate of Compliance with Provisions of the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act (Sept. 25, 2013)

Final Judgment (Oct. 24, 2013)

± DOJ web page

AB Inbev/Grupo Modelo
(private 2013)

Complaint for Injunctive Relief to Prohibit the Acquisition of Grupo Modelo by Anheuser-Busch InBEV as a Violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act 15 U.S.C. § 1, Edstrom v. Anheuser-Busch InBEV SA/NV, No. 3:13-cv-01309-MMC (N.D. Cal. filed Mar. 22, 2013)

Docket sheet (downloaded Apr. 15, 2014)

First Amended Complaint for Injunctive Relief to Prohibit the Acquisition of Grupo Modelo by Anheuse-Bbusch InBEV As a Violation of the Clayton Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. §18 , and to Prevent Price Fixing In Violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 (Apr. 17, 2013)

Notice of Motion and Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause Why a Premliminary Injuction Should Not Issue to Prohibit the Acquisition of Grupo Modelo by Anheuser-Busch InBEV as a Violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act 15 U.S.C. § 18, Memorandum of Points and Authorities (June 3, 2013)

Joint Notice to Court Regarding Temporary Restraining Order (June 4, 2013) (notifying court that transaction already had closed)

Defendants ABI's and Modelo’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion and Application for a Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause Why a Preliminary Injunction Should Not Issue (June 4, 2013)

Brief of Constellation Brands, Inc., in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (June 4, 2013)

Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Jun 5, 2013)

Notice of Motion and Motion, and Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendants ABI's and Modelo’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (June 3, 2013)

Defendant Constellation Brands Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Section 1 Claim for Failure to State a Cause of Action upon which Relief May be Granted and Memorandum in Support (June 3, 2013)

Second Amended Supplemental Complaint for Injunctive Relief to Prohibit the Acquisition of Grupo Modelo by Anheuser-Busch InBEV as a Violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C § 18, to Prevent Price Fixing In Violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, and, in the Alternative, for Divestiture and Damages and Demand for Jury Trial (June 25, 2013)

Notice of Motion and Motion, and Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendants ABI's and Modelo’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended and Supplemental Complaint (June 28, 2013)

Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Opposition to Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss and Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof (July 15, 2013)

Reply Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendants ABI's and Modelo’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended and Supplemental Complaint (July 22, 2013)

Defendant Constellation Brands, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended and Supplemental Complaint for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief Can Be Granted and Memorandum In Support (June 28, 2013)

Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Opposition to Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss and Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof (July 15, 2013)

Defendant Constellation Brands, Inc.’s Reply Memorandum in Support of its Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended and Supplemental Complaint for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief Can Be Granted (July 22, 2013)

Plaintiffs’ Notice of Motion and Motion for Injunction Seeking “Hold Separate” Order and Memorandum of Points and Authorities (June 28, 2013)

Defendants ABI’s and Modelo’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Injunction Seeking “Hold Separate” Order (July 12, 2013)

Defendant Constellation Brands, Inc.’s Opposition to Motion for Injunction Seeking “Hold Separate” Order (July 12, 2013)

Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Injunction Seeking “Hold Separate” Order (July 19, 2013)

Order Granting Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss; Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion fFor Preliminary Injunction (Sept. 13, 2013)

Letter to the Court from Joseph M. Alioto (Oct. 11, 2013) (notifying court that plaitniffs would not move for reconsideration and asking court to enter a final judgment)

Order of Dismissal (Oct. 16, 2013)

Notice of Motion and Motion for Relief from Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) or 60(b), or in the Alternative Rule 60(d) (Nov. 11, 2013)

Defendants’ Joint Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Relief from Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) or 60(bB), or in the Alternative Rule 60(d) (Nov. 19, 2013)

Plaintiffs’ Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Relief from Judgment Pursuant To Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) or 60(b), or in the Alternative Rule 60(d) (Dec. 1, 2013)

Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Relief from Judgment (Jan. 24, 2014)

Notice of Appeal (Feb. 21, 2014)

Ninth Circuit appeal

Docket sheet (No. 14-15337) (downloaded Apr. 15, 2014)

Bazaarvoice
(DOJ 2013)

± Bazaarvoice, Inc., Press Release, Bazaarvoice, Inc. Signs Definitive Agreement to Acquire PowerReviews, Inc. and Announces Preliminary Expectations for Fourth Fiscal Quarter 2012 Revenue and Preliminary Revenue (May 24, 2012) (announcing the signing of a definitive agree to purchase PowerReviews, Inc. for $151.9 million in cash and stock)

Complaint, United States v. Bazaarvoice, Inc., No. 13-cv-0133 (N.D. Cal. filed Jan. 10, 2013) (news release)

Docket sheet (downloaded Feb. 20, 2014)

Joint Case Management Statement, Discovery Plan and [Proposed] Order (Feb. 7, 2013)

Case Management and Pretrial Order for Court Trial (Feb. 19, 2013)

Defendant Bazaarvoice Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint (Feb. 22, 2013)

Stipulation and Protective Order (Mar. 4, 2013)

Joint Case Management Statement (May 2, 2013)

Joint Case Management Statement Pursuant to Court’s Reassignment Order (July 8, 2013)

Request and [Proposed] Order to Permit Equipment in the Courtroom (Sept. 9, 2013)

Joint Stipulation and Motion for the Admission of Exhibits at Trial (Sept. 17, 2013)

Appendix A: Plaintiff United States of America’s Amended Exhibit List (Sept. 17, 2013)

Appendix B: Defendant Bazaarvoice. Inc.’s Amended Exhibit List (Sept. 17, 2013)

Defendant’s Pre-Trial Brief (Sept. 20, 2013)

Plaintiff’s Trial Brief and Motion in Limine (Sept. 21, 2013)

Bench trial--started Sept. 23, 2013

United States Opening Statement Presentation (Sept. 23, 2013)

± Government trial exhibits

Civil Minutes (Sept. 23, 2013)
Civil Minutes (Sept. 24, 2013)
Civil Minutes (Sept. 25, 2013)
Civil Minutes (Sept. 26, 2013)
Civil Minutes (Sept. 27, 2013)

Civil Minutes (Sept. 30, 2013)
Civil Minutes (Oct. 1, 2013)

Motion for a Stay of Proceedings in Light of Lapse of Appropriations (Oct. 1, 2013) (denied)

Civil Minutes (Oct. 2, 2013)
Civil Minutes (Oct. 3, 2013)

Civil Minutes (Oct. 7, 2013)
Civil Minutes (Oct. 8, 2013)
Civil Minutes (Oct. 9, 2013)
Civil Minutes (Oct. 10, 2013)

United States Rebuttal Presentation (Oct. 13, 2013)

Civil Minutes (Oct. 15, 2013) (closing arguments) (Trial Log)

United States Closing Statement Presentation (Oct. 15, 2013)

Case Clip(s) Detailed Report (Oct. 15, 2013)

 

Plaintiff‘s Post-Trial Brief (Oct. 29, 2013)
Defendant’S Post-Trial Brief (Oct. 29, 2013)

Plaintiff’s Proposed Conclusions of Law (Oct. 31, 2013)

Plaintiff United States of America‘s Post-Trial Proposed Findings of Fact (Oct. 31, 2013)

Bazaarvoice's Final Proposed Findings of Fact (Nov. 5, 2013)

Appendix A: Customer Testimony-Public Version
Appendix B: List of Trial Witnesses
Appendix C: Trial Exhibit Lists

Defendant’s Proposed Conclusions of Law (Nov. 5, 2013)

Memorandum Opinion (Jan. 8, 2014) (finding for the DOJ on liability)

Remedy phase

Joint Statement Regarding Remedy Phase and [Proposed] Order (Jan. 17, 2014)

Order Regarding Remedy Phase (Jan. 22, 2014)

Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Final Judgment and Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Final Judgment (Feb. 12, 2014) (redacted version) (DOJ news release)

Defendant Bazaarvoice, Inc.'s Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Final Judgment

Plaintiff’s Reply Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Final Judgment (Mar. 12, 2014)

Settlement

± Bazaarvoice, Inc., News Release, Bazaarvoice Enters Into Letter of Intent With Viewpoints to Divest PowerReviews Business (Apr. 8, 2014)

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (Apr. 24, 2014)

Exhibit A: Plaintiff's Second Amended [Proposed] Final Judgment (Apr. 24, 2014)
Exhibit B: Explanation of Concent Decree Procedures (Apr. 24, 2014)

Competitive Impact Statement (May 8, 2014)

± Bazaarvoice, Inc., Press Release, Bazaarvoice Enters Into Definitive Agreement With Viewpoints to Divest PowerReviews Business (June 4, 2014) (announcing the sale of PowerReviews, LLC to Wavetable Labs, LLC for $30 million)

± DOJ web page

Commentary

± Nathan H. Miller, Modeling the Effects of Mergers in Procurement: Theory and an Application to Bazaarvoice/Power Reviews (Mar. 31, 2014).

FTC/St. Luke's
(FTC 2013)

District court

Complaint, FTC v. St. Luke’s Health Sys., Ltd., No. 1:12-cv-00560-BLW-REB (D. Idaho filed Mar. 26, 2013) (± FTC news release)

Docket sheet (No. 1:13-cv-00116-BLW) (downloaded Apr. 23, 2014)
Consolidated with Saint Alphonsus Med. Ctr. v. St. Luke's Health Sys., Ltd., No. 1:12-cv-00560-BLW-REB (D. Idaho filed Nov. 12, 2012) (lead case) on Mar. 19, 2013

Docket sheet (downloaded June 20, 2016) (see next case)

Order (Mar. 19, 2013) (consolidating with private case)

Answer of Defendant St. Luke’s Health System, Ltd. to Government Plaintiffs’ Complaint for Permanent Injunction (Apr. 5, 2013)

Answer of Defendant Saltzer Medical Group, P.A., to Plaintiffs' Complaint for Permanent Injunction (Apr. 5, 2013)

Plaintiffs' Joint Pre-Trial Memorandum (Sept. 10, 2013; redacted version filed Sept. 13, 2013)

Defendants’ Pretrial Memorandum (Sept. 10, 2013)

Pretrial Order (Sept. 17, 2013)

Memorandum Decision and Order (Jan. 24, 2014)

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Jan. 24, 2014)

Judgment (Feb. 28, 2014) (finding transaction violated Section 7 and permanently enjoining St. Lukes from acquiring the Saltzer Medical Group)

± FTC web page

Ninth Circuit

See next case

 

Saint Alphonsus/St. Luke's
(private 2012)

Complaint, Saint Alphonsus Med. Ctr. v. St. Luke’s Health Sys., Ltd., No. 1:12-cv-00560-BLW-REB (D. Idaho filed Nov. 12, 2012)

Docket sheet (downloaded June 20, 2016)

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Nov. 16, 2012)

Memorandum of St. Luke's Health System, Ltd. in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Dec. 4, 2012)

Statement of Material Facts for Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Dec. 4, 2012)

Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Dec. 12, 2012)

Supplement by Defendant St. Luke's Health System (Dec. 13, 2013) (Exhibit 1)

St. Luke's Health System, Ltd.'s Motion For Sur-Reply In Opposition To Plaintiffs' Motion For Preliminary Injunction (Dec. 13, 2013)

Memorandum Decision and Order (Dec. 20, 2012) (denying motion for preliminary injunction)

Case Management Order (Dec. 20, 2012)

Amended Complaint, Saint Alphonsus Med. Ctr. v. St. Luke’s Health Sys., Ltd., No. 1:12-cv-00560-BLW-REB (D. Idaho filed Jan. 15, 2013) (original filed Nov. 12, 2012)

Protective Order Governing the Production and Exchange of Confidential Information (Jan. 16, 2013)

Answer of Defendants St. Luke’s Health System, Ltd. and St. Luke’s Regional Medical Center, Ltd. to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint for Preliminary and Permanent Injunction and Damages (Jan. 22, 2013)

Order (Mar. 19, 2013) (consolidating with FTC case)

Amended Case Management Order (Apr. 3, 2013)

Second Amended Case Management Order (May 20, 2013)

Motion of St. Luke’s Health System, Ltd. and St. Luke’S Regional Medical Center, Ltd. for Partial Summary Judgment as to Private Plaintiffs’ Price-Based Claims (July 23, 2013)

Memorandum of Points and Authorities of St. Luke’s Health System, Ltd. and St. Luke’s Regional Medical Center, Ltd. in Support of their Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to Private Plaintiffs’ Price-Based Claims (July 23, 2013)

Opposition brief filed under seal (Aug. 6, 2013)

Reply of St. Luke’s Health System, Ltd. and St. Luke’S Regional Medical Center, Ltd. in Support of their Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to Private Plaintiffs’ Price-Based Claims (Aug. 16, 2013)

Memorandum Decision and Order (Sept. 24, 2013) ( granting motion for partial summary judgment to the extent it seeks to dismiss the claim for damages by the private plaintiffs St. Al's Health System Inc., St. Al's Regional Medical Center Inc., St. Al's Medical Center Nampa, Inc., and Treasure Valley Hospital Limited Partnership contained in the Amended Complaint (docket no. 63) at 153(C) and denying in all other respects).

Memorandum Decision and Order (Sept. 25, 2013) (denying motion motion to bar the testimony of Directors Armstrong and Deal)

Plaintiffs' Joint Pre-Trial Memorandum (Sept. 10, 2013; redacted version filed Sept. 13, 2013)

Defendants’ Pretrial Memorandum (Sept. 10. 2013)

Pretrial Order (Sept. 17, 2013)

Bench trial commenced September 23, 2013

Day 1 (Sept. 23, 2013)
Day 2 (Sept. 24, 2013)
Day 3 (Sept. 25, 2013)
Day 4 (Sept. 26, 2013)
Day 5 (Sept. 27, 2013)
Day 6 (Sept. 30, 2013)
Day 7 (Oct. 1, 2013)
Day 8 (Oct. 2, 2013)
Day 9 (Oct. 3, 2013)
Day 10 (Oct. 8, 2013)
Day 11 (Oct. 9, 2013)
Day 12 (Oct. 10, 2013)
Day 13 (Oct. 11, 2013)
Day 14 (Oct. 15, 2013)
Day 15 (Oct. 16, 2013)
Day 16 (Oct. 17, 2013)
Day 17 (Oct. 18, 2013)
Day 18 (Oct. 21, 2013)
Day 19 (Nov. 7,. 2013) (closing arguments)

Plaintiffs’ Corrected Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Public Version) (Dec. 9, 2013)

Defendants' Corrected Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Dec. 9, 2013) (part 1)
Defendants' Corrected Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Dec. 9, 2013) (part 2)

Plaintiffs’ Amended Corrected Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Public Version) (Dec. 30, 2013)

Memorandum Decision and Order (Jan. 24, 2014)

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Jan. 24, 2014)

Judgment (Jan. 28, 2014) (finding transaction violated Section 7 and permanently enjoining St. Lukes from acquiring the Saltzer Medical Group)

Notice of Appeal (Mar. 3, 2014)

Application for stary pending appeal

Defendants’ Motion for Stay Pending Appeal (Mar. 4, 2014)

Memorandum in Support of Defendants’ Motion for Stay Pending Appeal (Mar. 4, 2014)

Government Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for a Stay Pending Appeal (Mar. 31, 2014)

Private Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Stay (Apr. 1, 2014)

Reply In Support of Stay Pending Appeal (Apr. 17, 2014)

Private Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Brief in Opposition to Motion for Stay and Memorandum in Support (May 30, 2014)

Defendants’ Opposition to Private Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Brief in Opposition to Motion for Stay Pending Appeal (June 6, 2014)

Private Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of Motion fFor Leave to File Supplemental Brief in Opposition to Stay (June 10, 2014)

Memorandum Decision and Order (June 18, 2014)

 

Defendants’ Motion for Temporary Stay Pending Application for Relief from the Ninth Circuit (June 19, 2014)

Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Motion for Temporary Stay Pending Application for Relief from the Ninth Circuit (June 20, 2014)

Defendants’ Reply in Support of Motion for Temporary Stay Pending Application for Relief from the Ninth Circuit (June 24, 2014)

Order (June 25, 2014)

Attorneys' fees

Plaintiff State of Idaho's Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees and Non-Taxable Costs (Mar. 14, 2014)

Plaintiff State of Idaho’s Memorandum in Support of its Motion for Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Non-Taxable Costs (Mar. 14, 2014)

Saint Alphonsus' Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs (Mar. 14, 2014)

Memorandum in Support of Saint Alphonsus’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (Mar. 14, 2014)

St. Luke’s Opposition to Private Plaintiffs’ Memorandum on Entitlement to Fees and Costs (Apr. 16, 2014)

Private Plaintiffs’ Reply Memorandum on Entitlement to Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (Apr. 30, 2014)

Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply Brief in Reply to Private Plaintiffs’ Reply Memorandum on Entitlement to Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (May 5, 2014)

Memorandum in Support of Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply Brief in Reply tTo Private Plaintiffs’ Reply Memorandum on Entitlement to Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (May 5, 2014)

St. Luke’s Sur-Reply in Opposition to Private Plaintiffs’ Memorandum on Entitlement to Fees and Costs (May 5, 2014) (proffered)

Private Plaintiffs’ Opposition to St. Luke’s Motion For Leave to File Sur-Reply Brief on Entitlement to Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (May 9, 2014)

Ninth Circuit

Docket sheet (downloaded July 29, 2014)

Brief of Appellants (June 12, 2014)

Brief for Amici Curiae International Center of Law & Economics and Medicaid Defense Fund in Support of Defendants-Appellants Urging Reversal (June 19, 2014)

Motion of Appellants for Stay Pending Appeal—Urgent Motion Under Circuit Rule 27-3(b) (June 24, 2014)

Brief for Amicus Curiae Medicaid Defense Fund in Support Of Defendants-Appellants Urgent Motion for a Stay (June 27, 2014)

Opposition of the Federal Trade Commission and the State of Idaho to Motion for Stay Pending Review (July 7, 2014)

Saint Alphonsus Medical Center-Nampa; Saint Alphonsus Health System Inc.; Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center, Inc.; and Treasure Valley Hospital Limited Partnership’s Response to Motion of Appellants for Stay Pending Appeal (July 7, 2014)

Reply in Support of Appellants’ Motion for Stay Pending Appeal (July 14, 2014)

Federal Trade Commision, Idaho Attorney General’S Office, Saint Alphonsus Medical Center-Nampa; Saint Alphonsus Health System Inc.; Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center, Inc.; and Treasure Valley Hospital Limited Partnership’s Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply in Opposition to Motion of Appellants for Stay Pending Appeal (July 16, 2014)

Appellants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply in Opposition to Appellants’ Motion for Stay Pending Appeal (July 17, 2014)

Order (July 25, 2014) (granting motion for stay of relief pending appeal)

Answering Brief of Saint Alphonsus Medical Center-Nampa; Saint Alphonsus Health System Inc.; Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center, Inc.; aAnd Treasure Valley Hospital Limited Partnership (July 16, 2014)

Answering Brief for Plaintiffs/Appellees the Federal Trade Commission and the State of Idaho (Aug. 13, 2014)

Brief of Amicus Curiae the States of California, Washington, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, and Tennessee (Aug. 20, 2014)

Brief of the Association of Independent Doctors as Amicus Curiae in Support of Appellees (Aug. 20, 2014)

Amicus Brief of America’s Health Insurance Plans in Support of the District Court’s Ruling (Aug. 20, 2014)

Brief for Amicus Curiae Center for Payment Reform in Support Of Plaintiff/Appellee the Federal Trade Commission and Affirmance of the District Court’s Order (Aug. 20, 2014)

Brief of Amici Curiae Economics Professors in Support of Plaintiffs/Appellees urging Affirmance (Aug. 20, 2014)

Saint Alphonsus Med. Ctr.-Nampa Inc. v. St. Luke’s Health System, Ltd., No. 14-35173 (9th Cir. Feb. 10, 2015).(reported as 778 F.3d 775)

On remand

Memorandum Decision and Order (Apr. 29, 2015) (re entitlement of private plaintiffs to attorneys' fees)

Saint Alphonsus Medical Center-Nampa, Inc., Saint Alphonsus Health System, Inc. and Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center,Inc.’s Motion for Approval of Reasonableness of Legal Fees and Costs (May 21, 2015)

Saint Alphonsus Medical Center-Nampa, Inc., Saint Alphonsus Health System, Inc. and Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center,Inc.’s Brief in Support of Motion for Approval of Reasonableness of Legal Fees and Costs (May 21, 2015)

St. Luke’s and Saltzer’s Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motions for Attorney’s Fees and Costs and Bills of Costs (Aug. 19, 2015)

Saint Alphonsus’ Reply Brief in Support of its Motion for Approval oOf Reasonableness of Legal Fees (Oct. 19, 2015)

Memorandum Decision (Mar. 28, 2016)

Judgment for Attorney Fees and Costs (Mar. 28, 2015)

Order to Maintain Assets and Appointing a Monitor and a Divestiture Trustee (Dec. 10, 2015)

Divestiture Trustee Status Report No. 1 (for January 2016)
Divestiture Trustee Status Report No. 2 (for February 2016)
Divestiture Trustee Status Report No. 3 (for March 2016)
Divestiture Trustee Status Report No. 4 (for April 2016)
Divestiture Trustee Status Report No. 5 (for May 2016)
Divestiture Trustee Status Report No. 6 (for June 2016)

Monitor Report No. 1 (Jan. 12, 2016)
Monitor Report No. 2 (Feb. 10, 2016)
Monitor Report No. 3 (Mar. 10, 2016)
Monitor Report No. 4 (Apr. 10, 2016)
Monitor Report No. 5 (May 10, 2016)
Monitor Report No. 6 (June 10, 2016)

Twin America
(DOJ/New York 2012)

Complaint, United States v. Twin America, LLC, No. 1:12-cv-08989-ALC-GWG (S.D.N.Y. filed Dec. 11, 2012)

Docket sheet (downloaded Mar. 6, 2016)

Answer of Defendants Twin America, LLC, Citysights LLC, and City Sights Twin, LLC (Feb. 11, 2013)

Answer of Defendants Coach USA, Inc. and International Bus Services, Inc. (Feb. 11, 2013)

Joint Electronic Discovery Submission No. 1 and [Proposed] Order (Mar. 8, 2013)

Stipulated Protective Order (Mar. 14, 2013)

Scheduling Order (Mar. 14, 2013)

Order (June 6, 2013) (Gorenstein, MJ) (on pretrial procedures)

Plaintiff United States's Unopposed Motion for Stay In Light of Lapse of Federal Appropriations and Proposed Order (Oct. 1, 2013) (granted Oct. 2, 2013)

Plaintiff United States's Unopposed Motion to Lift Stay in Light of Restoration of Federal Appropriations and Enter Amended Scheduling Order (Oct. 18, 2013) (granted Oct. 21, 2013)

[Proposed] Order Granting Plaintiff United States's Unopposed Motion to Lift Stay in Light of Restoration of Federal Appropriations

[Proposed] Amended Scheduling Order

Amended Scheduling Order (Oct. 21, 2013)

Stipulated Agreement and Order Regarding Preservation of Privilege Claims (Nov. 1, 2013)

Joint Preliminary Trial Report (May 30, 2014)

Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment (June 20, 2014)

Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (June 20, 2014; redacted version filed June 23, 2015)

Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (July 18, 2014; redacted version filed June 23, 2015)

Reply Memorandum of Law in support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Aug. 1, 2014; redacted version filed June 23, 2015)

Order Granting Motion to Adjourn Pretrial Deadlines in Order to Finalize Settlement (Dec. 11, 2014)

Stipulation and Order Regarding Proposed Final Judgment (Mar. 16, 2015) (DOJ news release) (NYS AG news release)

[Proposed] Final Judgment (March 16, 2015)

Competitive Impact Statement (March 16, 2015)

United States' Explanation of Consent Decree Procedures (March 16, 2015)

Response of Plaintiff United States to Public Comment on the Proposed Final Judgment (July 28, 2015)

Plaintiff United States’ Motion and Memorandum for Entry of the Proposed Final Judgment (Aug. 11, 2015)

Final Judgment (Nov. 17, 2015)

± DOJ web page

 

Follow-on private action

Complaint, Bhandari, v. Twin America LLC, No 1:13-cv-00711 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 31, 2013)

Docket sheet (downloaded Mar. 17, 2015)

Class Action Complaint, Bhandari, v. Twin America LLC, No 1:13-cv-00711 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 13, 2013)

Consent Motion for Consolidation and for Approval of Initial Scheduling Order (Apr. 23, 2013)

Order Designating Master Docket and Case File Number and Establishing Procedures for Subsequent Related Actions (Apr. 26, 2013)

Consolidated Class Action Complaint, In re NYC Bus Tour Antitrust Litig., No. 1:13-cv-00711-ALC-GWG (S.D.N.Y. filed apr. 26, 2013)

Answer of Defendants Twin America, LLC, Citysights LLC, and City Sights Twin, LLC (May 17, 2013)

Answer of Defendants Coach USA, Inc. and International Bus Services, Inc. (May 17, 2013)

Stipulated Agreement and Order Regarding Preservation of Privilege Claims (Nov. 1, 2013)

Notice of Motion for Class Certification (Nov. 4, 2013)

Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certif'ication (Nov. 4, 2013)

Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification (Jan. 14, 2014) (filed under seal)

Plaintiffs’ Reply Memorandum of Law in Further Support of Class Certification (Feb. 26, 2014)

 

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement with Defendants (May 20, 2014)

Plaintiffs’ Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement with Defendants (May 20, 2014)

Order Preliminarily Approving Class Action Settlement (June 16, 2014)

Order and Final Judgment Approving In re NYC Bus Tour Antitrust Litigation Class Action Settlement (Oct. 21, 2014)

Order and Judgment Awarding Fees and Expenses (Oct. 21, 2015)

Express Scripts/Medco Health Solutions (Private 2012)

 

—Closure of FTC merger review

Statement of the Federal Trade Commission Concerning the Proposed Acquisition of Medco Health Solutions by Express Scripts, Inc. (Apr. 2, 2012) (± FTC news release)

Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Brill (Apr. 2, 2012)

Closing Letter to Counsel for Express Scripts, Inc. (Mar. 30, 2012)

Closing Letter to Counsel for Medco Health Solutions, Inc. (Mar. 30, 2012)

—Complaint (private action)

Complaint, National Ass'n of Chain Drug Stores v. Express Scripts, Inc., No. 2:12-cv-00395-CRE (W.D. Pa. filed Mar. 29, 2012)

Docket sheet (downloaded Nov. 17, 2013) (closed Aug. 6, 2013)

—Motion for a TRO

Plaintiffs' Amended Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order/Permanent Injunction and Expedited Schedule (Apr. 2, 2012)

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order/Permanent Injunction and Expedited Schedule (Apr. 2, 2012)

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, consistent with the discussions that took place during the status conference of 4/03/2012, Plaintiffs' Amended Motion for Temporary Restraining Order will be converted to a Motion for Preliminary Injunction. A hearing on said Motion will be held before the undersigned on 4/10/2012 at 2:15 P.M. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants shall file a brief in response to Plaintiffs' Amended Motion for Temporary Restraining Order on or before 4/06/2012. Plaintiffs' reply thereto, if any, shall be filed on or before 4/09/2012, and shall be limited to ten pages. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, if any, shall be filed on or before 4/06/2012. Plaintiffs' response to any Motion to Dismiss is due by 4/09/2012. Neither Defendants' motion, nor Plaintiffs' response, shall exceed 25 pages in length. Signed by Judge Cathy Bissoon on 4/03/2012. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (dad) (Entered: 04/03/2012)

Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Exhibits Thereto (Apr. 5, 2012) (filed under seal)

Hearing transcript (Apr. 10, 2012)

Memorandum Order (Apr. 25, 2012) (denying plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction)

Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (Mar. 30, 2012)

Exhibit 1: Affidavit Pursuant to Rule 65(b)

—Defendants' motion to dismiss

Defendants Express Scripts, Inc.’s and Medco Health Solutions, Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Apr. 6, 2012) (Proposed order)

Defendants Express Scripts, Inc.’s and Medco Health Solutions, Inc.’s Memorandum of Law in Support of their Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Apr. 6, 2012)

Plaintiffs’ Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Apr. 9, 2012)

Brief of Amici Curiae Consumer Federation of America, National Consumers League, National Legislative Association on Prescription Drug Prices and U.S. PIRG in Support of Plaintiffs (Apr. 19, 2012)

Memorandum Order (Aug. 27, 2012)

Defendants Express Scripts, Inc.’s and Medco Health Solutions, Inc.’s Request for Judicial Notice in Support of their Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Apr. 6, 2012)

Defendants Express Scripts, Inc.’s and Medco Health Solutions, Inc.’s Brief in Support of Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Apr. 6, 2012)

Exhibit 1: Statement of the Federal Trade Commission Concerning the Proposed Acquisition of Medco Health Solutions by Express Scripts, Inc.
Exhibit 2: FTC closing letter
Exhibit 3: Pharmacists: Express Scripts-Medco Merger Would Raise Prescription Drug Costs, Reduce Patient Choice of Pharmacy
Exhibit 4: National Ass'n of Chain Drug Stores, Press Release
Exhibit 5: Medco Health Solutions, Inc. Form 8-K (Mar. 12, 2012)
Exhibit 6: Medco Health Solutions, Inc. Form 8-K (Mar. 28, 2012)

Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendants’ Motion Requesting Judicial Notice (Apr. 9, 2012)

—Amended complaint

Amended Complaint (Sept. 10, 2012)

 
—Motion to dismiss amended complaint

Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint (Oct. 29, 2012)

Defendants Express Scripts, Inc.’s and Medco Health Solutions, Inc.’s Memorandum of Law in Support of their Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint (Oct. 29, 2012)

Plaintiffs’ Opposition To Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss Certain Claims (Dec. 3, 2012)

Defendants Express Scripts, Inc.'s and Medco Health Solutions, Inc.'s Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of their Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 65) Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 62) (Dec. 17, 2012)

 
—Voluntary dismissal

Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice (Aug. 6, 2013)

 
—Commentary
 

± Michael G. Cowie and Paul T. Denis, The Fall of Structural Evidence in FTC and DOJ Merger Review, Antitrust Source, Feb. 2013.

OSF/RMH
(FTC 2011)

Section 13(b) proceeding

Docket sheet (downloaded June 30, 2013)

Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Nov. 18, 2011) (unsealed Dec. 1, 2011)

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff's Motions for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Nov. 18, 2011) (unsealed Dec. 1, 2011)

Memorandum Opinion and Order (Apr. 5, 2012) (granting preliminary injunction)

Plaintiff's Notice of Withdrawal of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Nov. 18, 2011)

Plaintiff’s Expert Affidavits in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Nov. 23, 2011)

Plaintiff’s Expert Affidavits in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Jan. 11, 2012)

Plaintiff’s Final Evidentiary Hearing Witness List (Jan. 24, 2012)

 

Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Jan. 27, 2012; redacted version filed Apr. 19, 2012)

Defendants' Pre-Hearing Memorandum (Jan. 27, 2012; redacted version filed Apr. 19, 2012)

 

Plaintiff’s Supplemental Post-Hearing Memorandum in Support of Preliminary Injunction (Feb. 14, 2012; redacted version filed Apr. 19, 2012)

Plaintiff’s Proposed Findings of Fact (Feb. 14, 2012; redacted version filed Apr. 19, 2012)

Defendants' Reply to Plaintiff's Supplemental Post-Hearing Memorandum (Feb. 21, 2012; redacted version filed Apr. 19, 2012)

Defendants' Post-Hearing Brief (Feb. 14, 2012; redacted version filed Apr. 19, 2012)

Defendants' Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Feb. 14, 2012; redacted version filed Apr. 19, 2012)

Plaintiff’s Post-Hearing Reply Memorandum in Support of Preliminary Injunction (Feb. 21, 2012; redacted version filed Apr. 19, 2012)

 

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission’s Proposal for Preliminary Injunction Hearing (Nov. 22, 2011)
Defendants' Proposed Preliminary Injunction Hearing Schedule (Nov. 22, 2011)

Exhibit A: Order, FTC v. ProMedica Health Sys., Inc., No. 3:11-cv-00047-DAK (N.D. Ohio Jan. 1, 2011)

Minute Order (Nov. 23, 2011) (three days of hearings with no more than four witnesses from each side)

Agreed Motion for Entry of Preliminary Injunction Hearing Schedule (Nov. 30, 2011)

Exhibit A: Plaintiff's and Defendants' Joint Proposed Preliminary Injunction Hearing Schedule (Nov. 30, 2011)

Plaintiff’s Motion for Clarification of Preliminary Injunction Hearing Schedule (Dec. 12, 2011)

Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Clarification of Preliminary Injunction Hearing Schedule (Dec. 14, 2011)

Reply to Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Clarification of Preliminary Injunction Hearing Schedule (Dec. 15, 2011)

Protective Order (Dec. 28, 2011)
Amended Protective Order (Jan. 6, 2012)

Memorandum Order and Opinion (Apr. 5, 2012) (entering preliminary injnuction) (reported at 852 F. Supp. 2d 1069)

Judgment in a Civil Case (Apr. 5, 2012)

FTC web site

Graco/Illinois Tool Works
(FTC 2011)

D.D.C. court proceeding under FTC Act § 13(b)

Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Pursuant to Section 13(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, FTC v. Graco Inc., No. 1:11-cv-02239-RLW (D.D.C. filed Dec. 16, 2011; unsealed Dec. 23, 2011) (seeking to enjoin Graco's acquisition of Illinois Tool Works)

Docket sheet (downloaded Aug. 5, 2012)
± FTC web page

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's Memorandum in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Dec. 16, 2011; redacted version filed Dec. 23, 2011)

Order (Dec. 19, 2011) (denying FTC's motion for a TRO and ordering defendants to give FTC at least two weeks' notice prior to consummating the transaction)

Motion (Dec. 13, 2011)

Memorandum of Law in Support of Graco's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Improper Venue and to Transfer (Dec. 13, 2011)

Opposition of Plantiff Federal Trade Commission to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Improper Venue and to Transfer (Dec. 23, 2011)

Reply in Support of Graco's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Improper Venue and to Transfer (Dec. 28, 2011)

Plaintiff’s Supplemental Opposition to Defendant Graco’s Motion to Dismiss or Transfer: Responses to the Court’s Questions (Jan. 13, 2012)

Reply to Plaintiff's Supplemental Opposition to Graco's Motion to Dismiss and Transfer (Jan. 17, 2012)

Order (Jan. 26, 2012) (denying motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and granting motion to transfer case to the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota)

Memorandum Opinion (Jan. 26, 2012)

D. Minn. proceeding

Docket sheet (downloaded Aug. 5, 2012)

Transcript of Status Conference (Feb. 16, 2012)

Answer of Defendant Graco Inc. to the Federal Trade Commission’s Complaint (Feb. 29, 2012)

Answer of Respondents Illinois Tool Works Inc. and Illinois Tool Works Finishing LLC (Feb. 29, 2012)

Joint Stipulation of Dismissal (Mar. 27, 2012)

Order of Dismissal (Mar. 27, 2012)

HDD mergers (FTC, EC, China 2011)

Seagate/Samsung

European Comm'n, Press Release IP/11/660, Mergers: Commission opens in-depth investigations into two proposed acquisitions in the hard disk drive sector (May 30, 2011) (± EC web site)

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on Mergers (Oct. 4, 2011)

Final Report of the Hearing Officer, Seagate/HDD Business of Samsung (COMP/M.6214) (Oct. 5, 2011)

European Comm'n, Press Release IP/11/1213, Mergers: Commission clears proposed acquisition of Samsung's hard disk drive business by Seagate Technology (Oct. 19, 2011)

 

Statement of the Federal Trade Commission Concerning Western Digital Corporation/Viviti Technologies Ltd. and Seagate Technology LLC/Hard Disk Drive Assets of Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (Dec. 7, 2011)

Western Digital/Hitachi Global Storage Technologies Ltd.

European Comm'n, Press Release IP/11/660, Mergers: Commission opens in-depth investigations into two proposed acquisitions in the hard disk drive sector (May 30, 2011) (± EC web site)

European Comm'n, Press Release IP/11/1395, Mergers: Commission clears Western Digital's acquisition of Hitachi's hard disk drive business subject to conditions (Nov. 23, 2011)

Complaint, In re Western Digital Corp., No. C-4350 (FTC Mar. 5, 2012) (± news release)

Agreement Containing Consent Order (Mar. 5, 2012)

Decision and Order (Mar. 5, 2012)

Order To Maintain Assets (Mar. 5, 2012)

Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order To Aid Public Comment (Mar. 5, 2012)

Statement of the Commission (Mar. 5, 2012)

Federal Register notice (Mar. 12, 2012)

± FTC web site

AT&T/T-Mobile
(DOJ 2011)

Complaint, United States v. AT&T Inc., No. 1:11-cv-1560 (D.D.C. filed Aug. 31, 2011) (DOJ news release)

Docket sheet (downloaded Oct. 25, 2011)

U.S. Dep't of Justice, Antitrust Div., Press Release, Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole at the AT&T/T-Mobile Press Conference (Aug. 30, 2011)

U.S. Dep't of Justice, Antitrust Div., Press Release, Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by Acting Assistant Attorney General Sharis A. Pozen at the ATT/T-Mobile Press Conference (Aug. 31, 2011)

± Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, Press Release, Statement of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski (Aug. 31, 2011)

± AT&T, Press Release, AT&T Statement on Department of Justice Action (Aug. 31, 2011)

Letter from the Attorneys General of Arkansas, Utah, Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota, West Virginia and Wyoming to the Antitrust Division and the FCC in support of the merger (July 27, 2011)

Answer (Sept. 9, 2011)

Stipulated Protective Order Concerning Confidentiality (Sept. 15, 2001)

Status Report on Stipulated Scheduling and Case-Management Order (Sept. 16, 2011)

Stipulated Scheduling and Case-Management Order (Sept. 16, 2011)

Amended Complaint (Sept. 16, 2011) (joining New York, Washington, California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Ohio, and Pennsylvania as plaintiffs)

Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint (Sept. 23, 2011)

Stipulated Scheduling and Case-Management Order (Sept. 23, 2011)

Second Amended Complaint (Sept. 30, 2011) (joining the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico as plaintiff)

Amended Stipulated Protective Order Concerning Confidentiality (Oct. 4, 2011)

United States' Unopposed Motion to Enter Order to Appoint a Special Master (Oct. 6, 2011)

[Proposed] Order (Oct. 6, 2011)

Joint Motion to Intervene by Sprint Nextel Corporation, Cellular South, Inc., and Corr Wireless Communications, L.L.C. to amend the Protective Order (Oct. 11, 2011)

Plaintiffs’ Statement in Support of Sprint’s, Cellular South’s, and Corr Wireless’s Motion to Amend the Protective Order (Oct. 12, 2011)

Memorandum of Defendants in Opposition to Joint Motion of Non-Parties Sprint Nextel Corporation, Cellular South, Inc., and Corr Wireless Communications, L.L.C. to Amend the Protective Order (Oct. 17, 2011)

Petitioners’ Reply Memorandum in Support of Joint Motion to Amend the Protective Order Pursuant to Rule 26(C) (Oct. 19, 2011)

MINUTE ORDER denying the Motion to Intervene by Sprint, Cellular South, and Corr Wireless, and denying the Joint Motion to Amend the Protective Order attached thereto, for the reasons stated today in open court. Signed by Judge Ellen S. Huvelle on Oct. 24, 2011 (Entered: 10/24/2011)

Plaintiffs’ Statement Respecting Trial Witnesses (Nov. 4, 2011) (proposed order)

Memorandum in Support of Defendants’ Proposed Order Governing Trial Witnesses (Nov. 4, 2011) (proposed order)

Plaintiffs' Supplemental Statement Respecting Trial Witnesses (Nov. 9, 2011) (proposed order)

Memorandum In Support Of Defendants’ Proposed Order Governing Trial Witnesses (Nov. 9, 2011) (directed to Special Master) (proposed order)

Scheduling Order (Nov. 13, 2011)

Plaintiffs' Motion Seeking Relief to Facilitate Efficient Trial Preparation (Nov. 16, 2011)

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion Seeking Relief to Facilitate Efficient Trial Preparation (Nov. 16, 2011)

Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion Seeking Relief to Facilitate Efficient Trial Preparation (Nov. 18, 2011)

Reply Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion Seeking Relief to Facilitate Efficient Trial Preparation (Nov. 19, 2011)

Special Master Order No. 4 (Nov. 21, 2011)

Plaintiffs' Second Motion Seeking Relief to Facilitate Efficient Trial Preparation (Nov. 23, 2011)

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs' Second Motion Seeking Relief to Facilitate Efficient Trial Preparation (Nov. 23, 2011)

Defendants’ Memorandum In Support Of Proposed Order Governing Trial Preparation (Nov. 23, 2011) (proposed order)

Special Master Order No. 5 (Nov. 27, 2011)

Joint Motion to Stay (Dec. 12, 2011)

Order (Dec. 12, 2011)

Stipulation of Dismissal (Dec. 20, 2011)

Federal Communication Commission

± FCC web page

Sprint Nextel Corporation, Petition to Deny (May 31, 2011)

Attachment A: Joint Declaration of Steven C. Salop, Stanley M. Besen, Stephen D. Kletter, Serge X. Moresi, and John R. Woodbury, Charles River Associates, Economic Analysis of the Merger of AT&T and T-Mobile

Draft hearing designation order (Nov. 22, 2011) (concluding, based on a staff analysis,
that the record does not support a finding that the proposed AT&T/T -Mobile merger would serve
the public interest, convenience, and necessity and designating the proposed transaction for an administrative hearing) (not publicly released)

Staff Analysis and Findings

Order, In re Applications of AT&T Inc. & Deutsche Telekom AG (Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Nov. 29, 2011) (dismissing the applications without prejudice at the request of the parties)

Statement of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski (Nov. 29, 2011)
Statement of Commissioner Michael J. Copps (Nov. 29, 2011)
Statement of Commissioner Mignon L. Clyburn (Nov. 29, 2011)

NB: There was a comment on Harold Feld’s blog and subsequently a related filing by Public Knowledge and the Media Access Project that the FCC continue to review the applications even though the parties had withdrawn them. Here is ± AT&T's response. The FCC ultimately declined the invitation to continue the review.

Termination of transaction

AT&T Inc., Form 8-K (filed Dec. 20, 2011) (reporting on the termination of a material definitive Agreement)

± AT&T Inc., Press Release, AT&T Ends Bid To Add Network Capacity Through T-Mobile USA Purchase (Dec. 19, 2011)

± Deutsche Telekom AG, Press Release, AT&T and Deutsche Telekom terminate agreement on the sale of T-Mobile USA (Dec. 19, 2011)

U.S. Dep't of Justice, Press Release, Justice Department Issues Statements Regarding AT&T Inc.’s Abandonment of its Proposed Acquisition of T-Mobile USA Inc. (Dec. 19, 2011)

Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, Statement from FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski Regarding AT&T Inc.’s Abandonment of its Proposed Acquisition of T-Mobile USA Inc. (Dec. 19, 2011)

Commentary and white papers

Patrick DeGraba & Gregory L. Rosston, The Proposed Merger of AT&T and T-Mobile: Rethinking Possible (2011), in The Antitrust Revolution 34 (John E. Kwoka, Jr. & Lawrence J. White eds. 2014).

± Yan Li and Russell Pittman, The Proposed Merger of AT&T and T-Mobile: Are There Unexhausted Scale Economies in U.S. Mobile Telephony? ( EAG 12-2, Apr. 2012)

± American Antitrust Institute, The Effect of AT&T’s Acquisition of T-Mobile Is Likely to Substantially Lessen Competition (Aug. 2011)

± Joshua Wright, Do Exclusionary Theories of the AT&T / T-Mobile Transaction Better Explain the Market’s Reaction to the DOJ’s Decision to Challenge the Merger?, Truth on the Market.com (Sept. 1, 2011)

± Michael J. De La Merced, AT&T Ends $39 Billion Bid for T-Mobile, NYTimes.com DealBook (Dec. 19, 2011)

AT&T/T-Mobile
(Sprint private action 2011)

Complaint, Sprint Nextel Corp. v. AT&T Inc., No. 1:11-cv-01600 (D.D.C. filed Sept. 6, 2011)

Docket sheet (downloaded Oct. 25, 2011)

Notice of Designation of Related Civil Cases (Sept. 6, 2011)

Motion for Entry of Coordinated Scheduling Order and Case Management Plan, and of Protective Order Concerning Confidentiality; and Statement of Points and Authorities in Support (Sept. 16, 2011)

[Proposed] Coordinated Scheduling Order and Case Management Plan (Sept. 16, 2011)

MINUTE ORDER denying Sprint's Motion for Entry of Coordinated Scheduling Order and Case Management Plan, and of Protective Order Concerning Confidentiality, for the reasons stated in open court on September 21, 2011, and Oct. 24, 2011. Signed by Judge Ellen S. Huvelle on Oct. 25, 2011. (Entered: 10/25/2011)

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (Sept. 30, 2011)

Joint Opposition to Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss the Complaints of Sprint and Cellular South (Oct. 7, 2011)

Reply Memorandum in Support of Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss the Complaints of Sprint and Cellular South (Oct. 13, 2011)

Memorandum Opinion (Nov. 2, 2011) (finding that plaintiffs alleged plausible claims that the proposed acquisition would threaten them with injury in the market for wireless devices)

Southwest/AirTran
(private action 2011)

Complaint, Taleff v. Southwest Airlines Co., No. 11-02179 JW (N.D. Calif. filed May 3, 2011)
Note: The direct-purchaser plaintiffs filed their suit on May 3, 2011, one week after the merger had been cleared without remedies by the U.S. Department of Justice and the day after the merger was consummated.

District court proceeding

Docket sheet (No. 3:11-cv-02179-JW) (downloaded July 8, 2012)

Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion and Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (May 3, 2011)

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion and Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (May 3, 2011)

[Proposed] Temporary Restraining Order (May 3, 2011)

Order (May 4, 2011) (denying motion for TRO)
Note: The court denied the motion the day after the motion was filed, before the defendants had filed their opposition papers.

Notice of Appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (May 9, 2011) (docketing statement) (appealing denial of preliminary injunction)

Ninth Circuit proceeding re denial of prelimiminary injunction

Docket sheet (11-16173) (downloaded Mar. 26, 2013)

Emergency Motion for Injunction (May 9, 2011) (seeking preliminary injunction requiring defendants, who had closed their transaction, to hold their assets separately until the court of appeals decides Malaney)

Plaintiffs-Appellants’ Reply to Defendants’ Opposition to Emergency Motion for Injunction (May 23, 2011)

Order (June 2, 2011) (dismissing appeal for lack of jurisdiction)

Defendants-Appellees’ Motion for Sanctions Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927 (June 30, 2011)

Plaintiffs-Appellants’ Opposition to Defendants-Appellees’ Motion for Sanctions Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927 (Aug. 2, 2011)

Defendants-Appellees’ Reply in Support of their Motion for Sanctions Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927 (Aug. 12, 2011)

Order (Aug. 30, 2011) (granting motion for sanctions and referring matter to the Appellate Commissioner for determination of the amount of attorneys fees to be awarded)

Motion for Reconsideration of Order Granting Defendants-Appellees’ Motion for Sanctions Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927 (Sept. 13, 2011)

Defendants-Appellees’ Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration of Order Granting Motion for Sanctions Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927 (Oct. 11, 2011)

Plaintiffs’ Reply to Defendants’ Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration of Order Granting Sanctions Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. § 1927 (Oct. 20, 2011)

Order (Oct. 23, 2011) (denying motion for reconsideration)

Order (Feb. 10, 2012) (denying motion for reconsideration en banc)

Order (Appellate Commissioner Mar. 5, 2013) (ordering payment of fees to Southwest)

Amended Order (Appellate Commissioner Mar. 21, 2013) (ordering payment of fees to Southwest)

District court proceeding on merits

First Amended Complaint for Injunctive Relief Against Violations of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act (May 20, 2011)

Notice of Motion, Motion, and Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Aug. 8, 2011)

(1) Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint; and (2) Declaration of Thomas V. Christopher in Support Thereof (Aug. 8, 2011)

Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Complaint and Opposition to Defendants’ Request for Judicial Notice (Sept. 12, 2011)

Reply Memorandum in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint and in Support of Defendants’ Request for Judicial Notice (Sept. 28, 2011)

Order Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Nov. 30, 2011)

Judgment (Nov. 30, 2011)

Notice of Appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Dec. 15, 2011)

Ninth Circuit appeal on the merits

Docket sheet (No. 11-17995) (downloaded Mar. 6, 2014)

Appellants’ Opening Brief (May 4, 2012)

Appellants’ Request for Judicial Notice (May 8, 2012)

Appellees’ Answering Brief (June 18, 2012)

Appellees’ Opposition to Appellants’ Request for Judicial Notice (June 18, 2012)

Appellants’ Reply Brief (July 5, 2012)

Appellants’ Reply in Support of Request for Judicial Notice (July 5, 2012)

Notice of oral argument (Nov. 4, 2013) (scheduling oral argument for January 15, 2014)

Order (Jan. 2, 2014) ("The court is of the unanimous opinion that the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the briefs and records and the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument. Therefore, this case is ordered submitted without oral argument on January 15, 2014, in San Francisco, California. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).").

Memorandum and Order (Feb. 4, 2014)

Appellants’ Petition for Rehearing with A Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc (Mar. 4, 2014)

Order (Mar. 27, 2014) (denying petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc)

Supreme Court

Petition for Writ of Certorari (July 18, 2014)

Phoebe Putney/Palmyra
(FTC 2011)

FTC v. Phoebe Putney Health Sys., Inc., No. 1:11-cv-58 (WLS) (M.D. Ga. June 27, 2011) (denying preliminary injunction and dismissing complaint on state action grounds)

District court proceeding

Docket sheet (downloaded Jan. 11, 2014)

Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction [Redacted Public Version] (Apr. 20, 2011) (redacted version filed Apr. 26, 2011)

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Apr. 20, 2011)

Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Setting Preliminary Injunction Motion Briefing Schedule (Apr. 21, 2011)

Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Apr. 20, 2011)

Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc., Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital, Inc., and Phoebe North, Inc.’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction and In Support of Cross-Motion to Dismiss, and to Vacate the Temporary Restraining Order (May 16, 2011)

Defendants HCA Inc. and Palmyra Park Hospital’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction and In Support of Cross-Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment and to Dissolve the Temporary Restraining Order (May 16, 2011)

Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc., Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital, Inc., and Phoebe North, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss and Vacate (May 16, 2011)

Defendants HCA Inc. and Palmyra Park Hospital Cross-Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment and to Dissolve the Temporary Restraining Order (May 16, 2011)

Order (June 27, 2011) (denying FTC's motion for a preliminary injunction and granting defendants' motions to dismiss)

± FTC web site

Court of appeals

Docket sheet (downloaded Jan. 12, 2014)

Brief of Appellant Federal Trade Commission (July 27, 2011)

Brief of Appellees HCA Inc. and Palmyra Park Hospital, Inc. (Aug. 17, 2011)

Reply Brief of Appellant Federal Trade Commission (Aug. 23, 2011)

Opinion, FTC v. Phoebe Putney Health Sys., Inc., No. 11-12906 (11th Cir. Dec. 9, 2011)

Supreme Court

± Docket sheet
± Oyez site
± ABA Supreme Court site

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari (Mar. 23, 2012)

Waiver of right of respondents HCA, Inc. and Palmyra Park Hospital, Inc. to respond filed. (Apr. 10, 2012)

Brief of Respondents Hospital Authority of Albany-Dougherty County, et al. in opposition filed (May 18, 2012)

Reply of petitioner Federal Trade Commission (June 4, 2012)

Order (June 25, 2012) (granting writ of certiorari)

Brief for the Petitioner (Aug. 20, 2012)

Brief of Amici Curiae Economics Professors in Support of Petitioner (Aug. 20, 2012)

Brief of the American Antitrust Institute as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner (Aug. 27, 2012)
Brief for Joseph Stubbs, M.D. and Dr. Corleen Thompson as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner (Aug. 27, 2012)
Brief of Amici Curiae States of Illinois, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and West Virginia in Support of Petitioner (Aug. 27, 2012)
Brief of National Federation of Independent Business as Amicus Curiae in Support of the Petitioner (Aug. 27, 2012)

Brief of Amici Curiae the American Medical Association and the Medical Association of Georgia in Support of Neither Party (Aug. 27, 2012)

Brief for Respondents (Oct. 1, 2012)

Brief of the Lee Memorial Health System as Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondent (Oct. 9, 2013)
Brief of the American Hospital Association and Georgia Hospital Association as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents (Oct. 9, 2013)
Brief of Amici Curiae the Georgia Alliance of Community Hospitals, Inc. and the National Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems in Support of Respondents (Oct. 9, 2013)

Rely Brief for the Petitioner (Oct. 31, 2012)

Opinion (Feb. 19, 2013) (reversing and remanding)

Court of appeals on remand

Docket sheet

Letter to the Clerk, Eleventh circuit court of Appeals, from the Office of the Clerk, United States Supreme Court (Mar. 25, 2013)

Motion of the Federal Trade Commission for an Expedited Order of Remand (Apr. 18, 2013)

Response to Motion of the Federal Trade Commission for an Expedited Order of Remand (Apr. 18, 2013)

Reply of the Federal Trade Commission in Support of its Motion for an Expedited Order of Remand (Apr. 18, 2013)

Order (May 10, 2013) (granting motion to remand cause to district court)

Order (May 10, 2013) (denying motion to expedite as moot)

Mandate (May 10, 2013)

District court on remand

Docket sheet (downloaded Jan. 11, 2014)

Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint and Memorandum of Law in Support (Apr. 9, 2013) (FTC news release)

Exhibit: [Proposed] Amended Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction

Order (July 3, 2013) (granitng motion to file amended complaint)

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (Apr. 9, 2013)

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Apr. 9, 2013)

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission’sS Motions for Temporary Restraining Order and for Preliminary Injunction (Apr. 9, 2013)

Exhibit List to Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission’s Motions for Temporary Restraining Order and for Preliminary Injunction

Order (May 9, 2013) (advising the Parties that no action will be taken on the FTC's motions until entry of an order from the Eleventh Circuit remanding this case to this Court for further proceedings) (Mandate issued May 10, 2013)

Order (May, 15, 2013) (granting TRO)

Notice of Filing (June 3, 2013) (of stipulated preliminary injunction order)

Stipulated Preliminary Injunction Order (June 5, 2013)

± FTC web site (for federal court litigation)

Administrative proceeding

Administrative complaint (Apr. 20, 2011) (± news release)

Respondent Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc., Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital, Inc., and Phoebe North, Inc.’s Answer to the Federal Trade Commission’s Complaint (May 16, 2011)

Respondent HCA Inc. and Palmyra Park Hospital, Inc.’s Answer to the Federal Trade Commission’s Administrative Complaint (May 16, 2011)

Respondent Hospital Authority of Albany-Dougherty County’s Answer and Defenses to Administrative Complaint (May 16, 2011)

Administrative Law Judge’s Scheduling Order (May 31, 2011)

Respondent’s Unopposed Motion to Stay (July 1, 2011)

Administrative Law Judge’s Order Certifying Unopposed Motion for Stay (July 7, 2011)

Commission Order Granting Respondents’ Unopposed Motion To Stay Proceeding (July 15, 2011)

________

Complaint Counsel's Motion To Lift Stay (Feb. 22, 2013)

Respondent's Response to Complaint Counsel's Motion to Lift Stay (Mar. 6, 2013)

Order Granting Complaint Counsel’s Motion to Lift Stay (Mar. 14, 2013)

Motion to Dismiss HCA Inc. and Palmyra Park Hospital, Inc. (Apr. 5, 2013)

Commission Order Denying Motion to Dismiss Respondents HCA Inc. and Palmyra Park Hospital, Inc. from the Proceeding (Apr. 22, 2013)

 

 

 

± FTC web site

ProMedica/St. Luke's Hosp.
(FTC 2011)

Court proceeding

Docket sheet (downloaded July 29, 2011) (± FTC court proceeding web page)

Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Jan. 7, 2011)

Answer (Jan. 10, 2011)

Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law (Mar. 29, 2011)

Judgment Entry (Mar. 29, 2011)

FTC v. ProMedica Health Sys., Inc., No. 3:11-cv-47 (N.D. Ohio Mar. 29, 2011) (granting preliminary injunction)

Administrative proceeding

± FTC docket page

Administrative Complaint, In re ProMedica Health Sys., Inc., No. 9346 (F.T.C. filed Jan. 6, 2011) (redacted public version)

Protective Order Governing Discovery Material (Jan. 6, 2011)

Respondent ProMedica Health System, Inc.'s Answer to Complaint (Jan. 25, 2011)

Scheduling Order (Feb. 7, 2011)

Order Revising Scheduling Order (Mar. 3, 2011)

Complaint Counsel's Pre-trial Brief (May 24, 2011)

[Respondent's pretrial brief is not on the FTC web site]

Initial Decision (Dec. 12, 2011) (redacted version filed Jan. 5, 2012) (news release)

Respondent ProMedica Health System, Inc.'s Post-Trial Brief (Sept. 15, 2011)
Respondent ProMedica Health System, Inc.'s Proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order (Sept. 15, 2011)

Complaint Counsel’s Post-Trial Brief (Sept. 20, 2011)
Complaint Counsel’s Post-Trial Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Sept. 20, 2011)

Respondent ProMedica Health System, Inc.'s Proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order - Revised (Sept. 20, 2011)
Respondent ProMedica Health System, Inc.’s Post-Trial Reply Brief (Sept. 29, 2011)

Respondent ProMedica Health System, Inc's Replies to Complaint Counsel's Post-Trial Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Sept. 29, 2011)

Complaint Counsel's Post-Trial Reply Brief (Sept. 30, 2011)
Complaint Counsel's Reply Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Sept. 30, 2011)

Appeal to the full Commission

Respondent's Appeal Brief (Dec. 29, 2011)

Complaint Counsel's Appeal Brief (Dec. 29, 2011)

Respondent's Answering Brief to Complaint Counsel's Appeal (Jan. 17, 2012)

Complaint Counsel's Answering Brief (Jan. 19, 2012)

Complaint Counsel's Reply Brief (Jan. 24, 2012)

Respondent's Reply Brief in Support of its Appeal (Jan. 26, 2012)

Complaint Counsel's Compilation of Materials To Present During the Oral Argument (Feb. 2, 2012)

Respondent's Compilation of Materials to Present During Oral Argument (Feb. 2, 2012)

Opinion of the Commission (Mar. 28, 2012)

Concurring Opinion of Commissioner Rosch (Mar. 28, 2012)

Final order (Mar. 22, 2012) (publlic version Mar. 28, 2012) (± news release)

Appeal to the Sixth Circuit

Docket sheet (downloaded Apr. 23, 2014)

Public Brief of Petitioner (Sept. 17, 2012)

Public Brief for Respondent Federal Trade Commission (Nov. 14, 2012)

Reply Brief of Petitioner ProMedica Health System, Inc. (Dec. 12, 2013)

ProMedica Health System, Inc. v. FTC, No. 12-3583 (6th Cir. Apr. 22, 2014)

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari

Docket sheet (downloaded June 20, 2016)

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari (Dec. 22, 2014) (No. 14-762)

Brief for the Respondent in Opposition (Apr. 1, 2015)

Reply Brief for the Petitioner (Apr. 13, 2015)

Petition denied (May 4, 2015)
NB: The FTC's Final Order of May 22, 2012, became effective at this point

Relief

Application for Approval of Proposed Divestiture of St. Luke's Hospital (Apr. 25, 2016) (FTC News Release)

Labcorp/Westcliff Med. Labs.
(FTC 2011)

Preemptive declaratory judgment action

Bankr. C.D. Cal. docket sheet (downloaded June 1, 2011)

Complaint, In re Westcliff Med. Labs., Inc., Debtor, No. 8:10-bk-16743-TA (Bankr. C.D. Cal. Nov. 16, 2010)

Defendant's Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss (Nov. 24, 2010)

Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause regarding Preliminary Injunction (Nov. 18, 2010) (under seal)

Defendant’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause Regarding Preliminary Injunction (Dec. 7, 2010)

Application for Order Shortening Time on Motion by Plaintiffs Laboratory Corporation of America and Labwest, Inc. for Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause Regarding Preliminary Injunction (Dec. 2, 2010)

Docket entry: Hearing Held (RE: related document(s) Motion to Expedite Hearing filed by Defendant Federal Trade Commission) - MOTION DENIED. Court sua sponte abstain under 28 U.S. Code 1334 under the permissive abstention provision, not the mandatory provision. Court will also sign an order transferring this adversary proceeding to the District Court to be heard together with the FTC's action (Dec. 8, 2010)

Docket entry: Hearing Held on Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause regarding Preliminary Injunction (Related Doc. # 31 ) - MOTION DENIED. Court sua sponte abstain under 28 U.S. Code 1334 under the permissive abstention provision, not the mandatory provision. Court will also sign an order transferring this adversary proceeding to the District Court to be heard together with the FTC's action (Dec. 8, 2010)

Order Abstaining from Adversary Proceeding and Transferring Adversary Proceeding to District Court (Dec. 29, 2010)

Preliminary injunction proceeding:

D.D.C. docket sheet (downloaded June 1, 2011)

Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Pursuant to Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, FTC v. Laboratory Corp. of Am., No. 1:10-cv-02053-RWR (D.C. Cir. filed Dec. 1, 2010) (redacted)

Memorandum in Support of Federal Trade Commission's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Dec. 1, 2010)

Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue or for Failure to Sue the Acquirer of Assets or, in the Alternative, to Transfer Venue (Dec. 2, 2010) (Memorandum of Points and Authorities)

Opposition of Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue or for Failure to Sue the Acquirer of Assets or, in the Alternative, to Transfer Venue (Dec. 2, 2010)

Order (Dec. 3, 2011) (transferring case to the Central District of California from the District of Columbia)

Stipulated Order (Dec. 3, 2011) (extending Hold Separate Agreement)

Order Granting Defendants' Motion for Discovery and an Evidentiary Hearing (Dec. 16, 2010)

NB: The memoranda in support of and in opposition to the motion for a TRO and a preliminary injunction were filed under seal.

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(f) (Feb. 14, 2011)

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions (Feb. 16, 2011)

Defendants’ Reply in Further Support of Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions (Feb. 17, 2011)

Order Denying Preliminary Injunction (Feb. 22, 2011) (redacted)

Notice of Appeal by Federal Trade Commission to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Plaintiff's Notice of a Motion and Motion for an Injunction Pending Appeal (Feb. 23, 2011) (including memorandum of Points and Authorities)

Order on Plaintiff’s Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal (Feb. 25, 2011) (denying injunction)

C.D. Cal. Docket sheet (downloaded July 25, 2011)

Appeal to the Ninth Circuit

Order (9th Cir. Mar. 14, 2011) (denying FTC's emergency motion for injunctive relief)

Plaintiff-Appellant Federal Trade Commission's Motion for Voluntary Dismissal of Appeal (Mar. 23, 2011) (news release)

Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Julie Brill on the Commission’s Decision to Withdraw Its Appeal in FTC v. LabCorp (Mar. 23, 2011)

Ninth Circuit docket sheet (downloaded July 25, 2011)

Administrative proceeding

Administrative Complaint, In re Laboratory Corp. of Am., Dkt. No. 9345 (FTC filed Dec. 1, 2010) (news release)

Statement of the Commission (Nov. 30, 2011)
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Rosch

Protective Order Governing Discovery Material (Dec. 1, 2010)

Answer of Respondents Laboratory Corporation of America and Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings ( Dec. 16, 2010)

Administrative Law Judge’s Scheduling Order (Dec. 20, 2010)

Complaint Counsel's Motion to Compel Document Production (Jan. 3, 2011)

Administrative Law Judge's Order Denying Complaint Counsel's Motion to Compel Document Production (Feb. 8, 2011)

Respondents' Motion to Compel Document Production (Feb. 11, 2011)

Complaint Counsel's Opposition to Respondents' Motion to Compel Document Production
(Feb. 17, 2011)

Administrative Law Judge’s Order Regarding Respondents' Motion to Compel Document Production
(Feb. 24, 2011)

Complaint Counsel's Supplemental Opposition to Respondents' Motion to Compel Document Production (Mar. 7, 2011)

Respondents' Supplemental Brief in Further Support of Their Motion to Compel Document Production (Mar. 16, 2011)

Complaint Counsel's Motion for Leave to File a Reply to Respondents' Supplemental Brief in Further Support of Their Motion to Compel Document Production (Mar. 17, 2011)

Respondents' Opposition to Complaint Counsel's Motion for Leave To File a Reply to Respondents' Supplemental Brief in Further Support of Their Motion to Compel Document Production (Mar. 18, 2011)

Administrative Law Judge’s Order Revising Scheduling Order (Mar. 3, 2011)

Respondents' Motion to the Commission to Withdraw Matter from Adjudication (Redacted Public Version) (Mar. 23, 2011)

Commission Order Withdrawing Matter from Adjudication Until April 25, 2011, Pursuant To Rule 3.26(c) of the Commission Rules of Practice (Mar. 24, 2011) (news release)

Commission Order Returning Matter to Adjudication and Dismissing Complaint (Apr. 22, 2011) (news release)

Statement of Commissioners Leibowitz, Kovacic, and Ramirez (Apr. 21, 2011)
Concurring Statement of Commissioner Brill (Apr. 21, 2011)

± FTC administrative proceeding web site

United/Continental
(private action 2010)

U.S. Dept. of Justice, Antitrust Div., Press Release, United Airlines and Continental Airlines Transfer Assets to Southwest Airlines in Response to Department of Justice’s Antitrust Concerns (Aug. 27, 2010)

Agreement and Plan of Merger among UAL Corporation, Continental Airlines, Inc., and JT Merger Sub Inc. (Oct. 2, 2010)

United Continental Holdings, Inc., Press Release, News Release, United and Continental Close Merger (Oct. 1, 2010)

Complaint for Injunctive Relief Against Violations of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act, Malaney v. UAL Corp., Civ. No. 10-cv-2858 (N.D. Cal. filed June 29, 2010)

Docket sheet (downloaded Mar. 8, 2014)

Answer of Defendant UAL Corp. (Aug. 5, 2010)
Answer of Defendant Continental Airlines, Inc. (Aug. 5, 2010)

Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 9, 2010)

Scheduling Order (Aug. 10, 2010)

Discovery Order (Aug. 11, 2010)

Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 24, 2010) (redacted)

Rebuttal Report of Darren Bush (Aug. 26, 29010) (redacted)
Deposition designations (Darren Bush) (filed Aug. 24, 2010)

Defendants’ Joint Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 24, 2010) (redacted)

Testimony of Daniel Rubinfeld (Aug. 24, 2010) (Appendices A-D) (Exhibits 1-36)

Plaintiffs's Reply Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 29, 2010) (redacted)

Plaintiffs’ Post-Hearing Memorandum (Sept. 13, 2010)

Defendants’ Post-Hearing Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Sept. 13, 2010)

Defendants' Proposed Findings of Fact (Sept. 13, 2010)

Order denying preliminary injunction (Sept. 29, 2010)

Notice of Appeal (Oct. 1, 2010)

Ninth Circuit

Docket sheet (downloaded Oct. 3, 2013)

Emergency Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal Seeking Temporary "Hold Separate" Order (Oct. 1, 2010)

Defendants-Appellees’ Joint Motion to Dismiss Appeal and Opposition to Plaintiffs-Appellants’ Emergency Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal (Oct. 5, 2013)

Plaintiffs-Appellants’ Opposition to Defendants-Appellees’ Motion to Dismiss and Reply in Support of Emergency Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal (Oct. 6, 2010)

Order (Oct. 6, 2010) (denying motion)

Appellants’ Opening Brief (Oct. 29, 2013)

Defendants-Appellees’ Answering Brief (Dec. 10, 2013)

Appellants’ Reply Brief (Jan. 1, 2011)

Memorandum (May 23, 2011) (not for publication)

Mandate (July 18, 2011)

Supreme Court

Docket sheet (downloaded Oct. 3, 2013)

Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Oct 21, 2011)

Waiver of right of respondents UAL Corporation, et al. to respond filed (Nov 11, 2011)

Petition DENIED (Dec 12, 2011)

Merits proceeding

Notice of Motion and Motion (Aug. 22, 2011) (to amend complaint to add damages count)

[Proposed} First Amended Complaint for Damages aAnd Injunctive Relief Against Violations of Section 7 of tThe Clayton Antitrust Act (marked for changes)

Defendants’ Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint to Add Damages Claim (Sept. 20, 2011)

Plaintiffs’ Reply to Defendants’ Memorandum in Opposition to Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint to Add Damages Claim (Oct. 4, 2011)

Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Amend (Oct. 24, 2011)

First Amended Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief Against Violations of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act (Nov. 2, 2011)

Defendants’ Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6); Memorandum of Points and Authorities (Nov. 16, 2011)

Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (Dec. 6, 2011)

Reply Memorandum in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (Dec. 15, 2011)

Order Granting Motion to Dismiss (Dec. 29, 2011)

Judgment (Dec. 29, 2011)

Bill of Costs (Dec. 29, 2011)

Notice of Appeal (Jan. 26, 2012)

Merits appeal

Docket sheet (No. 12-15182) (downloaded on Mar. 9, 2014)

Appellants’ Opening Brief (Aug. 1, 2012)

Defendants-Appellees’ Answering Brief (Sept. 14, 2012)

Appellants’ Reply Brief (Oct. 26, 2012)

Memorandum (Jan. 16, 2014) (not for publication) (affirming dismissal of complaint)

Appellants’ Petition for Rehearing with a Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc (Jan. 30, 2014)

Order (Feb. 28, 2014) (denying petition for rehearing with a suggestion for rehearing en banc)

Supreme Court—Merits

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari (June 13, 2014)

Dun & Bradstreet/QED
(FTC 2010—settled by consent)

See above

Dean Foods
(DOJ 2010—settled by consent)

Complaint, United States v. Dean Foods Co., No. 10-C-0059 (E.D. Wis. filed Jan. 22, 2010)

Docket sheet (downloaded Oct. 3, 2013) (terminated Kuly 29, 2011)
Memorandum in Support of Partial Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for a More Definite Statement (Feb. 18, 2010) (Exhibits A, B, C, and D)
Plaintiffs' Response to Defendant's Partial Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for a More Definite Statement (Mar. 11, 2010)
Defendant’s Reply in Support of Partial Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for a More Definite Statement (Mar. 25, 2010)
Order (Apr. 7, 2010) (denying motion)

Rule 26(f) Order (Apr. 14, 2010)
Answer (Apr. 21, 2010)
Protective Order (May 20, 2010)
Scheduling and Case Management Order (June 3, 2010)

Brief in Support of Motion to Compel Answer to the First Interrogatory of Dean Foods Company (July 23, 2010)
Plaintiff's Response to Motion to Compel a Discovery Response to the First Interrogatory of Dean Foods Company (Aug. 13, 2010)

Declaration of Karl D. Knutsen in Support of Plaintiffs' Response to Motion to Compel a Discovery Response to the First Interrogatory of Dean Foods Company (Aug. 13, 2010)

Declaration of Joshua H. Soven in Support of Plaintiffs' Response to Motion to Compel a Discovery Response to the First Interrogatory of Dean Foods Company (Aug. 13, 2010)

Defendant’s Reply in Support of Motion to Compel an Answer to the First Interrogatory of Dean Foods Company (Aug. 27, 2010)

Plaintiffs' Sur-Reply in Further Response to Defendant’s Motion to Compel a Discovery Response to the First Interrogatory of Dean Foods Company (Sept. 1, 2010)

Lamar Advertising of South Dakota, Inc. v. Kay, 2010 WL 758786 (D.S.D. Mar. 1, 2010).

United States v. Urban Health Network Inc., Civ. No. 91-5976, 1993 WL 12811 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 19, 1993).

Lamer v. Williams Comm’ns, LLC, No. 04-CV-847-TCK-PJC, 2007 WL 445511 (N.D. Okla. Feb. 6, 2007)

Order (Oct. 8, 2013) (ordering plaintiffs to provide response)

[Proposed] Final Judgment (Mar. 29, 2011) (by consent)

Stipulation (Mar. 29, 2011)

Proposed Order (Mar. 29, 2011)

Competitive Impact Statement (Mar. 29, 2011)

Motion and Memorandum of the United States in Support of Entry of the Proposed Final Judgment (July 20, 2011)

Exhibit A: [Proposed] Final Judgment

Exhibit B: Certificate of Compliance with the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act (July 20, 2011)

Exhibit C: Olsen Email Pertaining to the [Proposed] Final Judgment (July 20, 2011)

Final Judgment (July 29, 2011) (consent decree)

± DOJ web site

Pfizer/Wyeth
(private action 2010)

Golden Gate Pharmacy Servs., Inc. v. Pfizer, Inc., 3:09-cv-03854-MMC (N.D. Cal. filed Apr. 20, 2010)

Docket sheet (downloaded Apr. 20, 2010)

Complaint for Injunctive Relief for Violations of the Clayton Antitrust Act, § 7, and the Sherman Act, § 1 (Aug. 21, 2009)

Order Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint; Dismissing Complaint with Leave to Amend; Vacating Hearing (Oct.14, 2009)

Amended Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief for Violation of United States Antitrust Laws (Oct. 16, 2009) (Exhibit A)

Order Granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint; Dismissing First Amended Complaint with Leave to Amend; Continuing Case Management Conference (Dec. 2, 2009)

Second Amended Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief for Violation of the Antitrust Laws of the United States (Jan. 8, 2010)

Order Granting Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint (Apr. 16, 2010)

ES&S/Diebold
(private action 2009)

Amended Complaint for Preliminary and Permanent Injunction and for Damages, Hart Intercivic, Inc. v. Diebold, Inc., Civ. A. No. 1:09-cv-678 (D. Del. filed Sept. 14, 2009)

Docket sheet (downloaded Mar. 10, 2010)

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Plaintiff’s Verified Motion for Temporary Restraining Order or Preliminary Injunction (Sept. 23, 2009)

Defendant Election systems & Software, Inc.'s Opposition to Plaintiff's Verified Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Sept. 28, 2009) (redacted version filed Oct. 2, 2009)

Opinion denying motion for TRO (Sept. 30, 2009)

Stipulation and Order to Extend Time (Dec. 10, 2009)

Defendant Diebold, Incorporated's Opening Brief in support of its Motion to Dismiss (Dec. 22, 2009) (redacted)

Plaintiff Hart Intercivic, Inc.’s Notice of Dismissal of Defendant Diebold Incorporated (Jan. 29, 2010)

 

United States v. Election Sys. & Software, Inc., Case No.: 1:10-vv-00380 (D.D.C. filed Mar. 8, 2010) (news release)

Asset Preservation Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (Mar. 8, 2010)
[Proposed] Final Judgment (Mar. 8, 2010)
Competitive Impact Statement (Mar. 8, 2010)

± DOJ web site

Lundbeck/Abbott Labs (NeoProfen)
(FTC 2008)

FTC's Complaint for Permanent Injunction and Other Equitable Relief, Including Disgorgement of Unlawful Monopoly Profits, FTC v. Ovation Pharms., Inc., No. 0:08-cv-06379-JNE-JJG (D. Minn. filed Dec. 16, 2008), plus concurring statements of Commissioners Leibowitz and Rosch

Complaint, Minnesota v. Ovation Pharms., Inc., No. 08-cv-6381 (D. Minn. filed Dec. 16, 2008)

Docket sheet (downloaded Sept. 7, 2010)
± FTC case filing web site

Pretrial Scheduling Order (Feb. 10, 2009)

Amended complaint, FTC v. Lundbeck Inc., 08-cv-6379 (JNE/JJG) (D. Minn. Apr. 10, 2009) (redline). Essentially changed Ovation's name to Lundbeck

Motion for summary judgment

Order (D. Minn. July 21, 2009) (denying defendants' motion for summary judgment)

Note: Briefs were filed under seal

Trial

Setting cases for trial on Dec. 7, 2009

Post-Trial Brief of Plaintiffs Federal Trade Commission and State of Minnesota (Jan. 29, 2010) (Plaintiffs' [Draft] Remedy Order)

Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of Plaintiffs Federal Trade Commission and State of Minnesota (Jan. 29, 2010)

Defendant Lundbeck Inc.'s Post Trial Brief (Feb. 19, 2010)

Defendant Lundbeck Inc.'s [Proposed] Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Feb. 19, 2010) (Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law)

Post-Trial Response of Plaintiffs Federal Trade Commission and State of Minnesota (Feb. 19, 2010)

Defendant Lundbeck Inc.'s Reply to Plaintiffs' Post Trial Brief (Feb. 29, 2010)

Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order (Aug. 31, 2010)

Appeal

Docket sheet (downloaded Aug. 22, 2011)

Brief for Plaintiffs-Appellants Federal Trade Commission and State of Minnesota (Dec. 27, 2010)

Addendum to Brief for Plaintiffs-Appellants Federal Trade Commission and State of Minnesota (Dec. 27, 2010)

Brief of Amicus Curiae American Antitrust Institute in Support of Appellants and Reversal of the District Court’s Decision (Jan. 3, 2011)

Brief of Amici Curiae States of Missouri, Illinois, Arkansas, Iowa, Maryland, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, and West Virginia in Support of Plaintiffs-Appellants (Jan. 24, 2011)

Brief for Defendant-Appellee Lundbeck Inc. (Feb. 17, 2011)

Reply Brief of Plaintiffs-Appellants Federal Trade Commission and State of Minnesota (Mar. 22, 2011)

FTC v. Lundbeck, Inc., No. 10-3458/3459 (8th Cir. Aug. 19, 2011) (affirming denial of preliminary injunction)

Petition for rehearing en banc

Petition for Rehearing En Banc of Plaintiffs-Appellants Federal Trade Commission and State Of Minnesota (Oct. 3, 2011)

FTC decision not to seek Supreme Court review

Statement of Chairman Leibowitz, Commissioner Ramirez, and Commissioner Brill in Federal Trade Commission and State of Minnesota v. Lundbeck, Inc. (Jan. 20, 2012) (announcing that the FTC will not seek review)

Statement of Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch in Federal Trade Commission v. Lundbeck, Inc. (Jan. 20, 2012) (dissenting from decision not to seek review)

Commentary


Gregory J. Werden, The Economics of FTC v. Lundbeck: Why Drug Mergers May Not Raise Prices, 9 J. Competition L. & Econ. 89 (2013).

± Gregory J. Werden, Mergers with Weak Competition: Reflections on FTC v. Lundbeck (Feb. 21, 2012).

± Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Mergers, Market Dominance and the Lundbeck Case (Dec. 4, 2011)

Whole Foods/Wild Oats Merger
(FTC 2007)

Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Pursuant to Section 13(b) of the FTC Act, FTC v. Whole Foods Mkt., Inc., No. 1:07-cv-01021 (D.D.C. filed June 6, 2007)

Fed. Trade Comm'n, News Release, FTC Seeks to Block Whole Foods Market’s Acquisition of Wild Oats Markets (June 5, 2007)

District court

Docket sheet (downloaded Oct. 7, 2013)

Consent Motion for Stipulated Temporary Restraining Order (June 7, 2007)

Stipulated Temporary Restraining Order (June 7, 2007)

Stipulated Joint Proposed Case Management Order (June 21, 2007) (Exhibit 1)

Answer of Defendant Whole Foods Market, Inc. (June 15, 2007)

Answer of Defendant Wild Oats Market, Inc. (June 15, 2007)

Stipulated Joint Proposed Case Management Order (June 21, 2007) (Exhibit 1)

Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (June 6, 2007)

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff's Motions for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (June 6, 2007) (public record version)

[Proposed] Temporary Restraining Order (June 6, 2007)

[Proposed] Preliminary Injunction Order (June 6, 2007)

Plaintiff's Certification of Efforts Given to Contact Defendants Regarding Filing of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (June 6, 2007)

Notice regarding Sealed Memorandum and Exhibits (June 6, 2007)

Notice of Errata To Memorandum In Support Of Plaintiff’s Motions For Temporary Restraining Order And Preliminary Injunction (June 13, 2007)

Plaintiff’s Motion to Unseal the Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Plaintiff’s Motions for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (June 22, 2007)

Exhibit A
Exhibit B

Expert Report of Kent Van Liere, Ph.D.

Expert Report of Kevin M. Murphy, Ph.D. (July 9, 2007)

Rebuttal Expert Report of Kevin M. Murphy, Ph.D. (July 13, 2007)

Supplemental Rebuttal Expert Report of Kevin M. Murphy, Ph.D. (July 16, 2007)

Defendants’ Motion To Strike Untimely Supplemental Expert Rebuttal Report (July 20, 2007) (Exhibit 1) ( Proposed order)

Plaintiff’S Opposition To Defendants’ Motion To Strike Untimely Supplemental Expert Rebuttal Report (July 23, 2007)

MINUTE ORDER denying Motion to Strike--July 25, 2007

 

Joint Memorandum of Points and Authorities of Whole Foods Markets, Inc. and Wild Oats Markets, Inc. in Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction (July 20, 2007)

Expert Report of David T. Scheffman, Ph.D.

Rebuttal Expert Report of David T. Scheffman, Ph.D.

Expert Report of John L. Stanton, Ph.D.

MOTION in Limine to exclude the expert report and testimony of Kellyanne Conway by Federal Trade Commission (July 24, 2007) (filed under seal)

FTC's Memorandum In Support of Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine to Exclude the Expert Report and Testimony of Kellyanne Conway (July __, 2007; public version filed July 26, 2007)

Memorandum in Opposition to re Motion in Limine filed by Whole Foods Market, Inc., Wild Oats Markets, Inc. (July 26, 2007) (Exhibit 1; Exhibit 2)

ORDER (July 27, 2007) (denying Motion in Limine to Exclude the Expert Report and Testimony of Kellyanne Conway)

 

Joint Reply Memorandum of Points and Authorities of Whole Foods Market, Inc. and Wild Oats Markets, Inc. in Opposition to Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (July 25, 2007) (public version)

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission’s Corrected Brief on its Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 1, 2007) (public version)

Amicus Brief on Behalf of the American Antitrust Institute, the Consumer Federation of America, and the Organization for Competitive Markets in Support of the Federal Trade Commission (Aug. 1, 2007)

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's Proposed Findings of Fact (Aug. 3, 2007; public version filed Aug. 14, 2007)

Part 2

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's Proposed Conclusions of Law (Aug. 3, 2007; public version filed Aug. 16, 2007)

Joint findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of Whole Foods, Inc., and Wild Oats Markets, Inc. in Opposition to Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 3, 2007)

Part 2
Part 3: Conclusions of law

Order denying preliminary injunction (Aug. 16, 2007)

Opinion (D.D.C. Aug. 21, 2007) (denying petition for preliminary injunction)
Reported as FTC v. Whole Foods Market, Inc., 502 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2007) (redacted version—original filed on Aug. 16, 2007)

Notice of Appeal of denial of preliminary injunction (Aug. 17, 2007)

Plaintiff's Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal (Aug. 17, 2007)

Joint Memorandum of Whole Foods Market, Inc. and Wild Oats Markets, Inc. in Opposition to Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal (Aug. 20, 2007)

Order denying injunction (D.D.C. Aug. 17, 2007)

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's Notice of Appeal (Aug. 17, 2007)

Appeal

Docket sheet (downloaded Oct. 21, 2009)

Administrative Injunction and Order for Additional Briefing (Aug. 20, 2007)
Order vacating administrative injunction and denying motion for injunction pending appeal (Aug. 23, 2007)

Motion to dismiss the case as moot (Oct. 9, 2007)
Federal Trade Commission's Opposition To Motion To Dismiss the Appeal As Moot (Oct. 22, 2007)
Reply (Oct. 29, 2007)

Proof Brief for Appellant Federal Trade Commission (Jan. 14, 2008) (public version)

Corrected Brief for Appellee Whole Foods Market, Inc. (Feb. 13, 2008)

Proof Reply Brief for Plaintiff-Appellant Federal Trade Commission (Feb. 27, 2008) (public version)

Original D.C. Circuit opinion (D.C. Cir. July 29, 2008)

 

Petition by Whole Foods Market, Inc. for Rehearing En Banc (Aug. 26, 2008)

Response of Federal Trade Commission to Petition For Rehearing En Banc (Sept. 12, 2008)

Appellee's Motion for Leave to File a Reply in Support of its Petition for Rehearing En Banc (Oct. 6, 2008)

Appellee's Motion for Leave to File a Reply in Support of its Petition for Rehearing En Banc

Reply in Support of Petition for Rehearing En Banc (Oct. 6, 2008)

Amended D.C. Circuit opinion (D.C. Cir. Nov. 21, 2008) (reported as 548 F.3d 1028). Reported as FTC v. Whole Foods Market, Inc., 548 F.3d 1028 (D.C. Cir. 2008)

Per Curiam Order denying petition for rehearing en banc (D.C. Cir. Nov. 21, 2008)

Per Curiam Order (D.C. Cir. Nov. 21, 2008) (replacing, on the court's own motion, the opinion and judgment issued July 29, 2008)

On remand to district court

Federal Trade Commission's Memorandum Regarding the Scope of this Remand Proceeding (Dec. 30, 2008)

Memorandum of Whole Foods Market, Inc. Regarding the Scope of the Remand Proceeding (Dec. 30, 2008) (Exhibit)

District court opinion on scope of remand (D.D.C. Jan. 8, 2009)

Federal Trade Commission's Description of Relief Sought in Remand Proceeding (Jan. 12, 2009) (Exhibit)

Notice of Voluntary Dismissal by the FTC (May 29, 2009)

Administrative proceedings

Administrative complaint, Dkt. No. 9324 (FTC filed June 28, 2007)

± FTC Whole Foods administrative trial web page

Amended administrative complaint, In re Whole Foods Market, Inc., Dkt. No. 9324 (FTC filed Sept. 8, 2008)

Scheduling order (Sept. 10, 2008)

FTC order amending scheduling order (Dec. 19, 2008)

Dissenting Statement of Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch (Dec. 19, 2008) (exhibit)

Third-party discovery:

Markey letter to competitors re discovery

Markey letter to Chairman Kovacic

Protective order (Oct. 10, 2008)

Whole Foods' Subpoena Duces Tecum to Competitors

Gelson's Motion to Quash (Dec. 8, 2008)

Whole Foods' Response to Gelson's Motion (Dec. 19, 2008)

ALJ Order Denying Motion to Quash (Dec. 23, 2008) (denying motion)

Settlement:

Order Withdrawing Matter From Adjudication (Mar. 6, 2009)

Agreement Containing Consent Orders (Mar. 6, 2009) (FTC news release) (requiring the divestiture of 19 non-operating stores, 12 acquired Wild Oats stores, one Whole Foods Market store and the Wild Oats intellectual property. and related assets)

FTC Decision and Order (Mar. 6, 2009) (provisionally accepting consent settlement)

FTC Order to Maintain Assets (Mar. 6, 2009)

Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Orders (Mar. 6, 2009)

Divestiture Trustee Agreement (Mar. 6, 2009)

FTC Letter Approving Trustee (Mar. 6, 2009)

FTC Decision and Order (May 29, 2009) (finally adopting consent settlement)

Commission Letter Granting Request of Divestiture Trustee to Extend Divestiture Period Until March 8, 2010 (Oct. 30, 2009) (news release)

Petition of Divestiture Trustee For Approval of Proposed Divestiture to Healthy Investments, LLC (Mar. 2, 2010) (one store)
Petition of Divestiture Trustee For Approval of Proposed Divestiture to A-M Holdings, LLC (Mar. 2, 2010) (one store)
Petition of Divestiture Trustee For Approval of Proposed Divestiture to Trader Joe's East, Inc. (Mar. 9, 2010) (one store)
Petition of Divestiture Trustee for Approval of Proposed Divestiture to Topco Associates LLC (Mar. 12, 2010)
Petition of Divestiture Trustee For Approval of Proposed Divestiture to Luberski, Inc. (Mar. 12, 2010)

Letter Approving Proposed Divestitures to A-M Holdings, LLC, Healthy Investments, LLC, Trader Joe’s East, Inc., and Luberski, Inc. and Denying the Proposed Divestiture to Topco Associates LLC (June 18, 2010) (approving sales of stores to Healthy, A-M, and Trader Joe's, approving sale of Wild Oats’ intellectual property to Luberski, Inc., approving sale of Alfalfa’s Markets’ intellectual property to A-M Holdings, and denying sale of the Wild Oats and Alfalfa’s intellectual property to Topco) ± (news release)

NB: As of March 17, 2012, the trustee had sold only three of the 32 stores subject to divestiture.

Commentary

± Thomas A. Lambert, Four Lessons from the Whole Foods Case, Regulation, Spring 2008, at 22

± Darren S. Tucker & Kevin Yingling, Too Hot to Handle: Internal Party Documents in Whole Foods and Other Modern Merger Challenges, Antitrust Source (Oct. 2007)

± David T. Blonder, 'Oops! Maybe I Shouldn't Have Said That': Antitrust and the Merger Review Process, Law.com (Sept. 19, 2007)

± Associated Press, Documents Describe Whole Foods’ Strategy, NYTimes.com (Aug. 15, 2007)

± David Kesmodel & John R. Wilke, Whole Foods Is Hot, Wild Oats a Dud—So Said 'Rahodeb', WSJ.com (July 12, 2007)

± David Kesmodel, CEO’s Words May Cook Whole Foods, WALL ST. J., June 20, 2007.

± Dana Cimilluca, Whole Foods’ Latest Organic Product? Foot in Mouth, WSJ.com Deal Journal (June 19, 2007)

Oracle/Peoplesoft
(DOJ 2004)

United States v. Oracle Corp., No C 04-0807 VRW ( (N.D. Ca. Sept. 9, 2004) (reported as 331 F. Supp. 2d 1098)

Docket sheet (downloaded Feb. 20, 2010)
Complaint (Feb. 25, 2004)
Judgment in a Civil Case (Dec. 8, 2004)
± DOJ web page

Commentary

± R. Preston McAfee, David S. Sibley & Michael A. Williams, Oracle’s Acquisition of Peoplesoft: U.S. v. Oracle (July 21, 2007), published in The Antitrust Revolution 144 (John E. Kwoka, Jr. & Lawrence J. White eds., 6th ed. 2014).

± Oliver Budzinski & Arndt Christiansen, The Oracle/PeopleSoft Case: Unilateral Effects, Simulation Models and Econometrics in Contemporary Merger Control (Marburger Volkswirtschaftliche Beiträge, Working Paper No. No. 02-2007, 2007), published at 34 Legal Issues of Economic Integration 133 (2007).

± David Millstone & Guhan Subramanian, Oracle v. Peoplesoft: A Case Study (Sept. 2005), final version at 12 Harv. Negot. L. Rev. 1 (2007).

Arch Coal/Triton
(FTC 2004)

Section 13(b) federal court proceeding: FTC v. Arch Coal, Inc., 329 F. Supp. 2d 109 (D.D.C. 2004)

Docket sheet (downloaded Sept. 7, 2013)

Complaint for Preliminary Injunction Pursuant to FTC Act § 13(b) (Apr. 1, 2004) (± FTC news release)

Answer of Defendant Arch Coal, Inc., To Federal Trade Commission's Complaint For Preliminary Injunction (Apr. 5, 2004)

Answer of Defendants New Vulcan Coal Holdings, LLC and Triton Coal Company, LLC to Federal Trade Commission's Complaint for Preliminary Injunction (Apr. 5, 2004)

Protective Order (Apr. 8, 2004)

Plaintiff's Motion For Preliminary Injunction (Apr. 8, 2004)

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Apr. 8, 2004; redacted filed Apr. 28, 2004) (redacted public version)

Memorandum in Opposition to Motion re for Preliminary Injunction (May 24, 2004) (filed under seal)

Reply Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction (June 14, 2004; redacted version filed Aug. 17, 2004) (filed udner seal)

Defendant Arch Coal's Motion for Full Consolidation of these Actions (Apr. 13, 2004)

Defendants' Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Rule 65(a)(2) Motion for Consolidation of Preliminary and Permanent Injunctions (Apr. 19, 2004)

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants' Motions Seeking Consolidation of Preliminary and Permanent Injunctions (Apr. 22, 2004)

Plaintiff States' Opposition to Defendants' Rule 65(a)(2) Motion for Consolidation of Preliminary and Permanent Injunction (Apr. 22, 2004)

Order (May 6, 2004) (denying defendants' motion to consolidate)

Motion in Limine by Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission to Exclude All Evidence and Argument on the Issue of Remedy (June 3, 2004)

Response of Amicus Curiae Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. to Motion in Limine by Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission to Exclude All Evidence and Argument on the Issue of Remedy (June 9, 2004)

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's Memorandum in Reply to Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion in Limlne (June 14, 2004)

Order (July 7, 2004) (denying FTC's motion to exclude)

Plaintiff's Post Hearing Brief (July 14, 2004; redacted version filed Aug. 16, 2004)

Post-Trial Brief and Proposed Findings of Fact by Arch Coal, Inc., New Vulcan Coal Holdings, LLC, Triton Coal Company, LLC (filed under seal)

Plaintiffs' Post-Hearing Reply Brief (July 16, 2004)

Memorandum Opinion (Aug. 16, 2004) (denying FTC's application for a prelimainry injunction) (reported at 329 F. Supp. 2d 109 (D.D.C. 2004))

Administrative proceeding:

± FTC web page

Complaint (Apr. 7, 2013)

Statement of Commissioner Thomas B. Leary (Apr. 7, 2004)

Answer of Defendants New Vulcan Coal Holdings, LLC and Triton Coal Company, LLC to the Federal Trade Commission’s Administrative Complaint (Apr. 28, 2013)

Protective Order (May 17, 2004)

Motion to the Commission for Withdrawal of Matter from Adjudication (Sept. 7, 2004)

Order Withdrawing Matter from Adjudication Pursuant to Rule 3.26(c) of the Commission Rules of Practice (Sept. 10, 2004)

Statement of the Commission (June 13, 2005)

Additional Statement of Commissioner Leary (June 13, 2005)

Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Harbour (June 13, 2005)

FTC policy statement

Statement of the Federal Trade Commission Policy Regarding Administrative Merger Litigation Following the Denial of a Preliminary Injunction, 60 Fed. Reg. 39741 (Aug. 3, 1995)

Commentary:

Patrick DeGraba, Coordinated Effects and Standards of Proof: The Arch Coal Merger (2004), in The Antitrust Revolution 89 (John E. Kwoka, Jr. & Lawrence J. White eds., 5th ed. 2009).

EchoStar/DirecTV
(DOJ 2002)

Complaint, United States v. Echostar Commc'ns Corp., No. 1:02CV02138 (D.D.C. filed Oct. 30, 2002)

Docket sheet (downloaded July 22, 2012)

Notice of Dismissal (Dec. 16, 2002) (voluntary dismissal by the United States)

Notice of Dismissal (Dec. 23, 2002) (voluntary dismissal by the plaintiff-states)

± DOJ web page

Federal Communications Commission (selected materials)

± FCC web page

± Filed Oppositions/Responses

± Agreement and Plan of Merger by and between EchoStar Communications Corporation and Hughes Electronics Corporation (Oct. 28, 2001)

Application

± Consolidated Application For Authority to Transfer Control filed by EchoStar Communications Corporation, General Motors Corporation and Hughes Electronics Corporation (Dec. 3, 2001)

± Declaration of Dr. Robert D. Willig on behalf of EchoStar Communications Corporation, General Motors Corporation and Hughes Electronics Corporation (Nov. 30, 2001)

± Hart-Scott-Rodino Waiver Letter to the U.S. Department of Justice from EchoStar Communications Corporation, General Motors Corporation, and Hughes Electronics Corporation (Jan. 7, 2002)

Declarations in opposition

Affidavit and Report of Daniel L. Rubinfeld (in support of Pegasus Communications Corporation’s Petition To Deny)

Paul W. MacAvoy, The Effects of the Proposed EchoStar–DirecTV Merger on Competition in DBS Rural Markets Where Cable is not Available

Mr. J. Gregory Sidak on behalf of the National Association of Broadcasters

Opposition to Petitions to Deny and Reply Comments filed by Echostar Communications Corporation, General Motors Corporation, and Hughes Electronics Corporation

Opposition To Petitions To Deny And Reply Comments pt. 1 (Feb. 25, 2002)
Opposition To Petitions To Deny And Reply Comments pt. 2 (Feb. 25, 2002)
Opposition To Petitions To Deny And Reply Comments pt. 3 (Feb. 25, 2002)

Declaration of Dr. Robert D. Willig

Responses

Response of the National Rural Telecommunications Cooperative (Feb. 25, 2002)

Surreply declarations

Ex Parte Reply to Opposition by the National Association of Broadcasters pt.1 (Apr. 4, 2002)
Ex Parte Reply to Opposition by the National Association of Broadcasters pt.2 (Apr. 4, 2002)
Ex Parte Reply to Opposition by the National Association of Broadcasters pt.3 (Apr. 4, 2002)

Ex Parte Reply To Opposition filed by the National Rural Telecommunications Cooperative (Apr. 4, 2002)

Reply Declaration of Paul W. MacAvoy on Behalf of the National Rural Telecommunications Cooperative (In Response to the Declaration of Dr. Robert D. Willig)

FCC decision

FCC Hearing Designation Order (Oct. 10, 2002) (redacted public version filed Oct. 18, 2002)

Powell Statement

Abernathy Statement

Copps Statement

Martin Statement

± Press Conference

Letter Withdrawing and Requesting Dismissal of Application (Dec. 10, 2002)

Order Dismissed Amendment to Consolidated Application for Authority to Transfer Control of various Commission authorizations and directed the Administrative Law Judge to terminate the pending hearing (Jan. 8, 2003)

Commentary

± Gregory L. Rosston, Antitrust Implications of Echostar-DirecTV Proposed Merger (Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research Nov. 2001).

David Reiffen, Michael R. Ward & John Wiegand, Duplication of Public Goods: Some Evidence on the Potential Efficiencies from the Proposed Echostar/DirecTV Merger (Apr. 2004).

± Dominance in the Sky: Cable Competition and the EchoStar-DIRECTV Merger: Hearing Before the S. Subcomm. on Antitrust, Business Rights and Competition, 107th Cong., Mar. 6, 2002 (Statement of Robert Pitofsky, Prof. of Law, Geo. U. L. Center).

Richard Gilbert & James Ratliff, Sky Wars: The Attempted Merger of EchoStar and DirecTV (UC Berkeley: Competition Policy Center 2000).

Staples/Office Depot
(FTC 1997)

FTC v. Staples, Inc., 970 F. Supp. 1066 (D.D.C. 1997)

Compalint, FTC v. Staples, Inc., No. 1:97CV00701 (D.D.C. filed Apr. 9, 1997) (FTC new release)

Docket sheet (downloaded Dec. 23, 2014)

First Amended Complaint, FTC v. Staples, Inc., No. 1:97CV00701 (D.D.C. filed Apr. 10, 1997) (seeking a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunctive relief)

Motion filed by plaintiff FTC for preliminary injunction (Apr. 10, 1997)

Motion filed by plaintiff FTC for temporary restraining order (Apr. 10, 1997)

Plaintiff's Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motions for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Apr. 10, 1997)

Defendants' Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Oppoistion to Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Apr. 11, 1997)

Plaintiff's Reply to Defendants' Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the Federal Trade Commission's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (May 8, 1997)

Trial transcript (May 19, 1997)
Trial transcript (May 19, 1997 pm)

Trial transcript (May 20, 1997)
Trial transcript (May 20, 1997 pm)

Trial transcript (May 21, 1997)
Trial transcript (May 21, 1997 pm)

Trial transcript (May 22, 1997)
Trial transcript (May 22, 1997 pm)

Trial transcript (May 23, 1997)

Trial transcript (June 5, 1997) (closing arguments)
Trial transcript (June 5, 1997 pm) (closing arguments)

Plaintiff's Corrected Post Trial Brief in Support of the Federal Trade Commission's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (June 2, 1997)

Plaintiff's Reply to Defendants' Joint Post-Hearing Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the Federal Trade Commission's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (June 4, 1997)

Order (June 30, 1997) (granting preliminary injunction)

Commentary

Serdar Dalkir & Frederick R. Warren-Boulton, Prices, Market Definition, and the Effects of Merger: Staples-Office Depot (1997), in The Antitrust Revolution 166 (John E. Kwoka, Jr. & Lawrence J. White eds., 6th ed. 2014).

± Jonathan B. Baker & Robert Pitofsky, A Turning Point in Merger Enforcement: Federal Trade Commission v. Staples (rev. Oct. 2006), published in Antitrust Stories (Eleanor Fox, ed., 2007).

± Frederick R. Warren-Boulton & Serdar Dalkir, Staples and Office Depot: An Event-Probability Case Study (Dec. 31, 1998), final version published in 19 Rev. Indus. Org. 467 (2001).

± Jerry A. Hausman & Gregory K. Leonard, Document Versus Econometrics in Staples (NERA Working Paper, Sept. 1997).

± Jonathan B. Baker, Econometric Analysis in FTC v. Staples, Prepared Remarks Before the American Bar Association Antitrust Section Economics Committee (Washington July 18, l997), final version published in 18 J. Pub. Policy & Mktg 11 (1999).

± Orley C. Ashenfelter, David Ashmore, Jonathan B. Baker, Suzanne Gleason & Daniel S. Hosken, Econometric Methods in Staples (Princeton Law & Public Affairs Working Paper No. 04-007 Apr. 9, 2004).

Microsoft/Intuit
(DOJ 1995)

Complaint for Injunctive Relief Against Combination in Violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Act, United States v. Microsoft Corp., No. ____ (N.D. Cal. filed Apr. 27, 1995)

Commentary:

± Lawrence M. Fisher, Microsoft in $1.5 Billion Deal to Acquire Intuit, NYTimes.com (Oct. 14, 1995)

± Graham Lea, Why Microsoft wanted to buy Intuit, The Register.com (Jan. 5, 1999)

Case Studies—Administrative Trials

Coca-Cola/Dr Pepper (FTC 1986)

Omnicare/PharMerica

Administrative Complaint, In re Omnicare, Inc., No. 9352 (FTC filed Jan. 27, 2012) (± news release)

Joint Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Feb. 21, 2012) (to dismiss the complaint as moot since the parties have abandoned the transaction)

Commission Order (Feb. 23, 2012) (dismissing complaint) (± news release)

± FTC docket sheet

ProMedica Health System
(FTC 2011)
 
Polypore/Microporous
(FTC 2008)

Administrative Complaint, In re Polypore Int'l, Inc., No. 9327 (FTC filed Sept. 10, 2008) (± news release)

Administrative trial

Answer and Defenses of Respondent (Oct. 15, 2008)
Scheduling Order (Oct. 22, 2008)

Initial Decision (Mar. 5, 2010) (public version) (FTC news release re original)

Appeal to the full Commission

Respondent's Revised Notice of Appeal (Mar. 15, 2010) (public version)
Respondent’s Appeal Brief (Apr. 23, 2010) (public version)
Answering Brief for Counsel Supporting the Complaint (May 24, 2010) (public version) (errata sheet)
Respondent’s Reply Brief (June 4, 2010) (public version)

Transcript of Oral Argument Before the Commission (July 28, 2010)

Opinion of the Commission (Dec. 13, 2010) (public version) (± news release)

Concurring Opinion of Commissioner Rosch (Dec. 13, 2010)

Final order (Dec. 13, 2010)

Commission Letter Approving Polypore Application For Approval of Proposed Monitor Trustee and Monitor Trustee Agreement (Mar. 23. 2011) (± news release)

± FTC docket sheet

Appeal to the Eleventh Circuit

Docket sheet (downloaded July 12, 2012)

Petition for Review (Jan. 28, 2011)

Jurisdictional Question (Feb. 28, 2011) (issued to Polypore Int'l)

Respondent's Response to Jurisdictional Question (Mar. 10, 2011)

Petitioner's Submission in Response to the Jurisdictional Question (Mar. 14, 2011)

Brief for Petitioner (May 4, 2011)

Brief for Respondent Federal Trade Commission (June 23, 2011) (public version)

Reply Brief for Petitioner (July 26, 2012)

Opinion, Polypore Int'l, Inc. v. FTC, No. 11-10375 (11th Cir. July 11, 2012) (reported as 686 F.3d 1208)

Evanston Northwestern Healthcare
 
 
 
Chicago Bridge/Pitt-Des Moines
(FTC 2001)
 
Coca-Cola/Dr Pepper
(FTC 1986)

Transactions

± Robert J. Cole, PepsiCo, Seven-Up Seen in Deal Today, N.Y. Times, Jan. 23, 1986 (reporting announcement of PepsiCo's proposed aquistiion of Seven-Up)

± Jube Shiver Jr., Coke May Buy Dr Pepper for $470 Million, L.A. Times, Feb. 21, 1986 (reporting announcement of Coca Cola's proposed acquisition of Dr Pepper)

± Jube Shiver Jr., Seven-Up Sale to Pepsi Off, L.A. Times, L.A. Times, June 24, 1986 (reporting cancellation of transaction following FTC's decision to challenge transaction)

± Jube Shiver Jr., PepsiCo Buys Seven-Up's Overseas Operations, L.A. Times, July 15, 1986 (reporting on PepsCo's acquisition of Seven-Up International)

± Dave Skidmore, Federal Judge Blocks Coke-Dr Pepper Merger, AP News Achieve, July 31, 1986

± Jube Shiver Jr., Forstmann, Little Will Sell Dr Pepper for $416 Million, L.A. Times, Aug. 21, 1986 (reporting pending sale of Dr Pepper to an investor group led by Hicks & Haas)

FTC Section 13(b) action against Coca-Cola/Dr Pepper

FTC v. Coca-Cola Co., 641 F. Supp. 1128 (D.D.C. 1986) (entering preliminary injunction on July 31, 1986), vacated as moot, 829 F.2d 191 (D.C. Cir.1987)

Administrative action

Complaint, In re Coca-Cola Co., No. 9207 (F.T.C. July 15, 1986) (reported at 117 F.T.C. 795)

Initial Decision, In re Coca-Cola Co., 117 F.T.C. 795, 798 (Nov. 30, 1990) (finding that the acquisition agreement, although not consummated, violated Section 5 of the FTC Act but denying Complaint Counsel's request for an order requiring Coca-Cola to obtain the prior approval of the Commission before acquiring any other concentrate or bottling company as contrary tot he public interest and therefore entering no cease and desist order)

Final Decision, In re Coca-Cola Co., 117 F.T.C. 795, 903 (June 13, 1994) (vacating denial of relief and entering an order requiring Coca Cola for a period of ten years to obtain the prior approval of the Commission before acquiring any part of the stock or interest in any company that manufactures or sells branded concentrate, syrup, or carbonated soft drinks in the United States)

Order, In re Coca-Cola Co., 119 F.T.C. 724 (May 25, 1995) (in settlement of pending petitions for review in the D.C. Circuit, reopening proceeding and modifying June 13, 1994, order to require for a period of ten years prior approval only if (1) Coca-Coca seeks to acquire any stock of other interest in Dr Pepper or any rights to the Dr Pepper brand, or (2) Coca-Cola seeks to acquire a name-brand soft drink company with sales of more than 10 million cases in each of the three prior years in a non-HSR reportable transaction) (± FTC news release)

Commentary

Lawrence J. White, Application of the Merger Guidelines: The Proposed Merger of Coca-Cola and Dr. Pepper, in The Antitrust Revolution: The Role of Economics 76 (John E. Kwoka, Jr. & Lawrence J. White eds., 2d ed. 1994).

 

13. Merger review and settlement

15. Merger risk assessment