FTC and California ex rel. Brown v. Watson Pharmaceuticals No. CV-09-00598 (C.D. Cal Feb. 12, 2009)

Plaintiff State and the FTC challenged so-called “reverse payment” agreement between Solvay Pharmaceuticals (patent holder) and Watson Pharmaceuticals, Par Pharmaceuticals and Paddock Laboratories that delayed the entry of a generic substitute for Androgel, a testosterone-replacement drug. State and the FTC alleged that Solvay, fearing the entry of lower-cost generic substitutes for Androgel, resolved patent litigation with the other three companies by making substantial payments to them, on the condition that they not enter the market with their generic version. the parties seek injunctive relief and fines of $2500 per violation under California antitrust law. Case was transferred to district court in Georgia and state did not re-file in Georgia, although the FTC did.

Read More →

Arizona ex rel. Goddard v. Gannett Co., Inc. (D. Ariz. 2009)

Two newspapers in Pima County sought to stop publishing one of the papers and share the profits on the other paper, pursuant to a change in their ongoing Joint Operating Agreement. Judge denied state’s request for TRO, on grounds that newspaper was a “failing firm.” State dismissed complaint.

Read More →

Minnesota v. Ovation Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 08 cv 6381, D.Minn.

Minnesota and the FTC filed companion cases in federal court, alleging that Ovation monopolized the market for drugs to treat PDA, a heart ailment in newborns. The complaint alleged that Ovation acquired the rights to the only two drugs used to treat PDA. Patents were expiring on the first drug, Indocin, when Ovation purchased the second drug approved for treatment of PDA. Upon making this purchase, Ovation raised the price of both drugs from $36 per vial to $500 per vial. The purchase of the rights to Indocin was below the HSR reporting threshhold.

Read More →

People ex rel. Spitzer v. Acordia and Wells Fargo (NY Sup. Ct.)

State alleged that insurance companies were paying kickbacks to Acordia, an insurance broker, for steering business to the insurer.

Read More →

Maine v. Flagship Cinemas Management, Inc., No. CV-03-087 (Kennebec Super. Ct. December 2003)

Complaint filed against owner of 12-screen suburban film complex, alleging defendant’s purchase of a downtown theater as well violated Maine’s antitrust law. The state sought divestiture of the downtown movie theater.

Read More →

New York v. Kraft General Foods, 862 F.Supp. 1030, 1993-1 Trade Cases P 70,284

Kraft acquired Nabisco’s ready-to-eat cereal assets for approximately 405 million dollars. The New York Attorney General’s Office brought suit to have the acquisition declared unlawful. The Attorney General’s Office argued that the acquisition would eliminate competition between Kraft and Nabisco and significantly reduced competition in the ready-to-eat cereal market. New York sought to have the acquisition declared unlawful. After trial, the claim was dismissed. The judge held the evidence was insufficient to show that the acquisition would substantially lessen competition

Read More →

New York v. Transit Mix Concrete Corp. 84 Civ. 4194 (S.D.N.Y.)

Ready-mix concrete producers and sellers in New York County and the surrounding four-county area combined in such a way as to eliminate all competition in the market.

Read More →

Idaho v. Daicel Chemical Co. et al., No. 30379 (Idaho 2005)

State filed suit on behalf of indirect purchasers after federal guilty pleas by sorbates manufacturers. Case dismissed on grounds that Idaho Competition Act which permitted recovery by indirect purchasers was not enacted until 2000 and did not permit retroactive application.

Read More →

Utah v. Daicel Chemical Industries, Ltd. (Civ. No. 20910931 MI) (3rd Dis. Utah, 2002)

Defendant sorbate manufacturers were charged with collusion, price-fixing and market allocation

Read More →

Utah v. Nucor Corp. et al. Civ. No. 2:01 CV 0106G (D.Utah 2001)

State of Utah sought to enjoin the acquisition by GS Insudstries, GST Steel or Moly-Cop Chile (together, GSI) of Nucor’s North American Grinding ball manufacturing assets in order to prevent the elimination of GSI’s only competitor in North America. In 2002, Kennecott Utah Copper, a user of large grinding balls joined the State in this action.

Read More →