United States and Plaintiff States v. American Airlines et al. (D. Mass. 1:21-cv-11558)
Seven states and the U.S. Department of Justice brought a lawsuit alleging that a joint venture between American Airlines and JetBlue, the Northeast Alliance, violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The plaintiff states and DOJ alleged that the defendants combined their operations at four airports, eliminating competition between them on routes involving those airports…
United States and Plaintiff States v. UnitedHealth et al. (D. Md. 1:24-cv-03267-JKB)
Four states and the U.S. Department of Justice brought a lawsuit seeking to block the acquisition of Amedysis, Inc. by UnitedHealth Group, Inc. The plaintiff states and DOJ alleged that the defendants are two of the largest home health and hospice service providers in the country and that their merger would eliminate competition between the…
United States and Plaintiff States v. Real Page (M.D.N.C. 1:24-CV-00710)
Nie attorneys general have joined the U.S. Department of Justice in a lawsuit against Real Page, Inc. In a January 2025 amended complaint, the plaintiff states and the DOJ added six large landlords as defendants. The lawsuit alleges that RealPage facilitates the anticompetitive information exchange of nonpublic, competitively sensitive information about rental rates and other…
United States and Plaintiff States v. Live Nation Entertainment et al (S.D.N.Y. 1:24-CV-03973-AS)
Forty attorneys general joined the U.S. Department of Justice in a lawsuit against Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. and its subsidiary, Ticketmaster L.L.C. The lawsuit alleges that Live Nation has undertaken anticompetitive conduct in various markets across the live concert ecosystem to maintain its monopoly positions in the markets for primary ticketing services for major concert…
U.S. and Plaintiff States v. Apple, Inc., No. 2:24-cv-04055 (D.N.J. Mar. 21, 2024)
Sixteen states and the U.S. Department of Justice filed a civil antitrust lawsuit against Apple for monopolization or attempted monopolization of smartphone markets in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act. The complaint, filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, alleges that Apple illegally maintains a monopoly over…
Ohio et al. v. National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), No. 1:23-cv-00100 (N.D. W.V. Dec. 7, 2023)
Seven plaintiff states filed suit against the NCAA in 2023, alleging that the NCAA’s transfer eligibility rule is an illegal restraint on college athletes’ ability to market their labor and control their education. The rule requires college athletes who transfer among Division 1 schools to wait one year before competing in games, unless they obtain…
U.S. and Plaintiff States v. Nexstar Media Group et al., No. 19-02295 (D.D.C. 08/01/19)
Nexstar agreed to acquire Tribune Media Company for approximately $6.4 billion. USDOJ and plaintiff states sued, alleging that the merger would likely substantially lessen competition in thirteen Designated Market Areas (DMAs). MVPDs, such as Comcast, DirecTV, and Charter, typically pay the owner of local broadcast stations in a given DMA a per-subscriber fee for the…
Washington v. Tyson Foods, Inc., No. 21-2-14174-5 (Wash. Super. Ct. King Cty. 2022)
Plaintiff state filed a lawsuit against 19 chicken producers accusing them of a wide-ranging illegal conspiracy to inflate and manipulate prices, rig contract bids and coordinate industry supply reductions to maximize profits. The defendants account for approximately 95 percent of the broiler chickens sold in the United States. The complaint asserts their conduct violates the…
United States et al. v. Google LLC, No. 1:23-cv-00108 (E.D. Va. Jan. 24, 2023)
The United States and eight plaintiff states sued Google for monopolizing multiple digital advertising technology products in violation of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act. The complaint alleges that Google monopolizes key digital advertising technologies, collectively referred to as the “ad tech stack,” that website publishers depend on to sell ads and that…
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…
