Colorado v. Rocky Mountain Paint & Body et al.
Plaintiff state reached settlement with auto body shops in Longmont Colorado to resolve allegations that they agreed to set prices for auto body work.
In the Matter of American Disposal Services, Inc., Ct. Super. Ct. 1994
Commercial waste hauling bid-rigging conspiracy
Pennsylvania v. Susquehanna Regional Airport Authority, 1-CV-05-1814 (M.D. Pa. 2005)
Regional airport authority sought to take land by eminent domain that was owned by sole competitor to authority’s parking lots.
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.
Washington v. Marquee Holdings, Inc., CV 05-2111 (W.D. Wash. 2005)
Plaintiff state reviewed merger of companies owning two large theater chains.
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.
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.
Louisiana v. Brunswick Bowling and Billiards Dover, Inc., et al. No. 95-CA-797 665 So.2d 520 (La. App. 5 Cir. 1995)
Defendants conspired to fix prices, enforced by a group boycott and price discrimination
New York v. Microsoft Corp., 97 F. Supp. 2d 59 (D.D.C. 2000)
U.S. Department of Justice and the Plaintiff States alleged that the Defendant, Microsoft Corporation violated State and Federal law by maintaining a monopoly in the market for Intel-compatible personal computer operating systems and by illegally tying its Windows operating system to its Internet Explorer browser.
Connecticut v. Koninklijke Ahold NV, Ahold USA, Inc et al., No. 396CV01349 (D. Conn. 1996)
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Plaintiff States sought to enjoin Ahold’s acquisition of The Stop & Shop Companies Inc. (Stop & Shop), alleging that the merger would substantially lessen competition within the supermarket industry.
