Tag: Nonmerger

The Williamsburg Area Association of Realtors, Inc. settled charges that it violated the antitrust laws by adopting rules that withheld valuable benefits of the Multiple Listing Services (MLSs) it controlled from consumers who chose to enter into non-traditional listing contracts with real estate brokers. According to the complaint, the association's rules or policies state that information about properties will not be made available on popular real estate Web sites unless the listing contracts are Exclusive Right to Sell Listings. These policies, when implemented, prevented properties with non-traditional listing contracts from being displayed on a wide range of public Web sites.The consent order settling the FTC’s charges will prohibit Williamsburg Area Association of Realtors from discriminating against non-traditional listing arrangements.

The Monmouth County Association of Reators settled charges that it violated the antitrust laws by adopting rules that withheld valuable benefits of the Multiple Listing Services (MLSs) it controlled from consumers who chose to enter into non-traditional listing contracts with real estate brokers. According to the complaint, the association's rules or policies state that information about properties will not be made available on popular real estate Web sites unless the listing contracts are Exclusive Right to Sell Listings. These policies, when implemented, prevented properties with non-traditional listing contracts from being displayed on a wide range of public Web sites.The consent order settling the FTC’s charges will prohibit Monmouth from discriminating against non-traditional listing arrangements.

Information and Real Estate Services, LLC settled charges that it violated the antitrust laws by adopting rules that withheld valuable benefits of the Multiple Listing Services (MLSs) it controlled from consumers who chose to enter into non-traditional listing contracts with real estate brokers. According to the complaint, the association's rules or policies state that information about properties will not be made available on popular real estate Web sites unless the listing contracts are Exclusive Right to Sell Listings. These policies, when implemented, prevented properties with non-traditional listing contracts from being displayed on a wide range of public Web sites.The consent order settling the FTC’s charges will prohibit IRES from discriminating against non-traditional listing arrangements.

The Realtors Association of Northeast Wisconsin, Inc. settled charges that it violated the antitrust laws by adopting rules that withheld valuable benefits of the Multiple Listing Services (MLSs) it controlled from consumers who chose to enter into non-traditional listing contracts with real estate brokers. According to the complaint, the association's rules or policies state that information about properties will not be made available on popular real estate Web sites unless the listing contracts are Exclusive Right to Sell Listings. These policies, when implemented, prevented properties with non-traditional listing contracts from being displayed on a wide range of public Web sites.The consent order settling the FTC’s charges will prohibit Realtors Association of Northeast Wisconsin from discriminating against non-traditional listing arrangements.

The Commission approved a final consent order settling Commission charges alleging that two independent practice associations (IPAs) and 18 member physician practices in the Kansas City, MO area, refused to deal with health care plans, except on collectively agreed-upon prices and other terms.

Valassis, a leading producer of free-standing newspaper inserts in the United States, has settled charges that it violated Section 5 of the FTC Act by attempting to collude with News America Marketing, its only rival, to eliminate competition between the two companies. During a conference call with industry analysts, a Valassis executive invited NewsAmerica to join in a scheme to allocate customers and fix prices in order to end an ongoing price war between the two companies. Under the consent order settling the FTC’s complaint, Valassis is barred from engaging in or inviting collusive agreements with other publishers or attempting to collude with its competitors.

After an administrative trial, the administrative law judge found that a group of affiliated intrastate movers had engaged in horizontal price-fixing by filing collective rates on behalf of its member motor common carriers for the intrastate transportation of property within the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The judge also ruled that the association’s conduct was not protected by the state action doctrine because the State of Kentucky did not supervise the rate-making practices of the group. On July 12, 2004, the Kentucky Household Goods Carriers Association, Inc. filed an appeal of the initial decision with the Commission. On June 22, 2005, the Commission issued a unanimous opinion finding that the Kentucky Household Goods Carriers Association, Inc. engaged in illegal price-fixing by jointly filing tariffs containing collective rates on behalf of its members, and that the state action doctrine does not immunize that activity from antitrust liability. On August 22, 2006, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the opinion of the Commission.

An administrative law judge dismissed a complaint in its entirety against Union Oil of California that charged the company with committing fraud in connection with regulatory proceedings before the California Air Resources Board regarding the development of reformulated gasoline. The judge ruled much of Unocal’s conduct was permissible activity under the Noerr-Pennington doctrine and that the resolution of the issues outlined in the complaint would require an in depth analysis of patent law which he believed were not with the jurisdiction of the Commission. In July 2004, the Commission reversed the judge’s ruling and reinstated charges that Unocal illegally acquired monopoly power in the technology market for producing a “summer-time” low-emissions gasoline mandated for sale and use by the CARB for use in the state for up to eight months of the year. While the case was pending before the administrative law judge, Unocal agreed to settle the claims and cease and desist enforcing Unocal’s patents covering reformulated gasoline that complies with California Air resources Board Standard, will not undertake any new enforcement efforts related to the particular patents, and will cease all attempts to collect damages, royalties, or other payments related to the use of any of the patents.  The settlement in this case was related to the settlement of FTC charges that Chevron's acquisition of Unocal would substantially lessen competition in the refining and marketing of CARB reformulated gasoline, as Chevron would acquire the relevant Unocal patents through the acquisition and would be able to use its position to coordinate with its downstream competitors, to the detriment of consumers.  See In the Matter of Chevron Corporation and Unocal Corporation.