California ex rel. Bonta v. KYB Copr.

As part of a large class action, plaintiff state filed suit against manufacturers of automotive shock absorbers, alleging that the defendants, from the mid-1990s through at least 2012, conspired to rig bids for, and to fix stabilize and maintain the price of shock absorbers installed in autos purchased by the plaintiff state. Defendant pled guilty…

Read More →

New York v. James Berlangero et al., case number 03958-2019

Read More →

Washington v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 22-2-01281-1 (Wash. Super. Ct. King Cty. Jan. 26, 2022)

Washington filed a complaint and settlement with Amazon, resolving claims that Amazon’s “Sold by Amazon” program , which allowed Amazon to agree on price with third-party sellers, rather than compete with them, violated antitrust laws.  The state alleged that Amazon unreasonably restrained competition in order to maximize its own profits off third-party sales, which constituted…

Read More →

Settlement Agreement Between Plaintiff States and Citibank (June 2018)

Forty-two plaintiff states reached a $100 million settlement with Citibank for fraudulent conduct involving interest rate manipulation that had a significant impact on consumers and financial markets around the world. UBS’ fraudulent conduct involved the manipulation of LIBOR (the London Interbank Offered Rate). LIBOR is a benchmark interest rate that affects financial instruments worth trillions…

Read More →

Korean Company Has Sufficient Nexus with State to Permit Gas Price Manipulation Suit by California Attorney General

A recent decision by the California Court of Appeal clarified that, to demonstrate the court’s personal jurisdiction over a defendant in an antitrust case, the attorney general must simply establish that a defendant’s activities directed at the California market have a direct nexus with the anticompetitive conduct alleged in the complaint. SK Trading International Co….

Read More →

How the State Center Supports the Antitrust and Consumer Protection Efforts of the Attorney General Community

Originally published on Jan. 20, 2022 As former attorneys general from Colorado and Indiana, we are proud to serve on the board of the Center for State Enforcement of Antitrust and Consumer Protection Laws, Inc. (State Center). This organization was first formed in early 2004 by a dedicated group of former state deputy attorneys general…

Read More →

Texas et al. v. Google (In re Google Digital Advertising Antitrust Litigation), No. 1:21-cv-06841 (S.D.N.Y.)

The plaintiff states originally filed their case in the Eastern District of Texas (No. 4:20-cv-00957 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 16, 2020) alleging that Google monopolized or attempted to monopolize products and services used by advertisers and publishers in online-display advertising on third-party sites. The complaint also alleged that Google engaged in false, misleading and deceptive acts…

Read More →

Colorado et al. v. Google, No. 1:30-cv-03715 (D.D.C. Dec. 17, 2020)

Thirty-eight states sued Google, alleging that Google illegally maintains its monopoly power over general search engines and related general search advertising markets through a series of anticompetitive contracts and conduct, hurting both consumers and advertisers. Consumers are denied the benefits of competition, including the possibility of higher quality services and better privacy protections. Advertisers are…

Read More →

Utah et al. v. Google LLC, No. 3:21-cv-05227 (N.D. Cal. July 7, 2021)

Thirty-seven states filed a lawsuit against Google for monopolizing the smartphone application market in violation of state and federal antitrust laws. According to the complaint, Google operates a web of exclusionary agreements with phone manufacturers and carriers to exert control over app distribution on Android phones through its Google Play Store. By leveraging those anticompetitive…

Read More →

Attorneys General to Congress: Provide States with the Same Antitrust Venue Rights as Federal Enforcers

Washington, D.C. — The National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) is urging Congress to pass the State Antitrust Enforcement Venue Act of 2021. The legislation would provide states with the same venue selection rights as federal enforcers by prohibiting the transfer of state antitrust actions into a multidistrict litigation. Attorneys general pursue antitrust enforcement actions…

Read More →