Connecticut v. Mylan Laboratories, Inc. (In re Lorazepam & Clorazepate Antitrust Litigation), MDL No. 1290 (D.D.C. June 15, 2000) 205 F.R.D. 369 (D.D.C. 2002); No. 98 CV 3115 (D.D.C. 2000) – complaint
Plaintiff States alleged that Mylan Laboratories, Inc.(Mylan) and other drug companies entered into illegal agreements to monopolize the market for certain generic anti-anxiety drugs.
In the Matter of Ralph’s & Yucaipa Companies
Merger of two southern California supermarket chains, parties entered into consent decree to divest 27 stores.
In the Matter of Sacramento Ambulance Companies
Plaintiff state charged five defendants, Metropolitan, Superior, Sacramento and Foothill Ambulance Service and 9-1-1 Emergency Services, with violating California’s antitrust law by unlawfully agreeing on customer allocation and pricing of ambulance transport services over a long period. The companies, who admitted no wrongdoing, paid $160,000 in civil penalties, costs and attorneys fees. They were also enjoined from future violations and required to establish a compliance program. The named executives may not participate in ambulance association activities except those involving paramedic or treatment topics.
California v. Marquee Holdings, Inc., C-05-5306 MEJ (N.D. Cal. 2005)
Plaintiff state challenged merger of two movie theater chains, alleging market power in San Francisco market. Defendants agreed to divestiture of two theaters in that market.
California v. DaVita Inc., CV 05-7190 RSWL (C.D. Cal. 2005)
Plaintiff State of California sought to enjoin the proposed acquisition by DaVita, Inc. of the hemodialysis facilities owned by Gambro Healthcare, Inc. a subsidiary of Gambro AB. California alleged that the merger would substantially reduce competition for the provision of renal dialysis services. The parties entered into a consent decree and judgment which provided for the divestiture of 35 clinic divestitures, and one piece of real property, as well as the appointment of a Monitor to assure compliance with the order.
California v. Sutter Health, et al. No. 3:99-cv-03803-MMC(N.D. Cal., 1999)
State sought preliminary injunction to block merger of two hsopitals in East Bay area. Injunction denied.
People of the State of California v. Econolite Control Products, Inc. (Ca. Super Ct. Los Angeles 2004)
Plaintiff state alleged tying of non-proprietary traffic signal equipment to proprietary signal controllers. After trial, final judgment for the state was entered in 2007.
People v. J.A. Momaney Services, Inc., No. 03426723 (San Francisco Superior Court 2003)
Challenge to tie-in sales of certain traffic signal equipment in bids to California public entities.
People v. John L. Sullivan Investments et al., No. 02AS07559 (Sacramento Superior Court 2003)
California Attorney General and Sacramento District Attorney challenged an alleged 1998 agreement among the four major Toyota dealers in Sacramento to cease advertising prices of new cars. Settlements including approx. $200,000 in civil penalties were concluded individually during 2003, with the fourth and final settlement filed November 12, 2003.
Oregon, et al. v. Mulkey; 3:97-cv-00234-MA
Horizontal price-fixing among commercial crab fishermen.
