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…

Read More →

FTC and Plaintiff States v. Syngenta Crop Protection AG, No. 22-cv-828 (M.D. N.C. Nov. 2022)

The FTC and 10 states sued pesticide manufacturers Syngenta Crop Protection and Corteva, Inc. two of the largest pesticide manufacturers operating in the United States. For allegedly paying distributors to block competitors from selling their cheaper generic products to farmers. The complaint alleges that these big pesticide firms run so-called “loyalty programs” in which distributors…

Read More →

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, 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 a waiver…

Read More →

FTC and Plaintiff States v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 2:23-cv-01495 (W.D. Wash. Sept. 26, 2023)

The FTC and plaintiff states alleged that Amazon, an online retail and technology company, is a monopolist that uses a set of interlocking anticompetitive and unfair strategies to illegally maintain its monopoly power. The lawsuit alleges that Amazon’s actions allow it to stop rivals and sellers from lowering prices, degrade quality for shoppers, overcharge sellers,…

Read More →

FTC and Plaintiff States v. Amgen, No. 23-CV-3053 (N.D. Ill. 06/22/23)

Plaintiff states  joined the Federal Trade Commission’s suit against Amgen’s planned $28 billion purchase of Horizon Therapeutics. The plaintiffs sought a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction blocking Amgen Inc. and its subsidiaries from completing the proposed acquisition. Horizon Therapeutics PLC makes the only U.S. FDA-approved treatment for thyroid eye disease, Tepezza, and the only FDA-approved…

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 →

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 →

Alabama et al. v. Endo International, No. 3:19-cv-04157 (N.D. Cal. July 19, 2019)

Eighteen states reached a settlement with Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. under which Endo paid $2.3 million to settle allegations it entered into a reverse-payment agreement to obstruct generic competition to Lidoderm, a pain relief patch frequently used to treat shingles. According to the complaint, Endo had an agreement with Watson Laboratories Inc. ensuring Endo would not face…

Read More →

Minnesota v. Tim Amdahl Chevrolet Co., No. K5-93-0677 (Winona Cty. Dist. Ct.)

Auto body repair shops conspired to fix prices by providing sham estimates on competitors’ letterhead.

Read More →

Minnesota v. Walz Buick Oldsmobile GMC, Inc.,, No. K9-93-0679 (Winona Cty Dist. Ct.)

Defendant auto body repair shop fixed prices by providing sham estimates on competitors’ letterhead.

Read More →