Tag: Competition

Shell Oil Company was allowed to complete its $1.8 billion acquisition of Pennzoil-Quaker State Company but required to divest certain assets to maintain healthy competition in the refining and marketing of Group II paraffinic base oil in the United States and Canada. Under terms of the consent order, Ski1 and Pennzoil must divest its 50 percent interest in Excel Paralubes (a base oil refinery in Westlake, Louisiana) and freeze Pennzoil's right to obtain additional Group II supply under a contract with ExxonMobil at approximately current levels (up to 6,500 barrels of base oil per day)

Southern Union Company settled antitrust concerns stemming from its proposed acquisition of the Panhandle pipeline from CMS Energy Corporation. The consent order permitted the acquisition but required Southern Union to terminate an agreement to manage the Central pipeline which transports natural gas to several counties in Missouri and Kansas.

A New Mexico physician organization settled charges that it and its members entered into agreements to fix prices and to refuse to deal with third party payers and other health care plans except on collectively agreed-upon terms.

MSC settled charges that its 1999 acquisitions of Universal Analytics, Inc. and Computerized Structural Analysis & Research Corp. eliminated competition between the three firms in the development and application of engineering software. The administrative complaint issued October 2001, alleged that the two acquisitions would eliminate competition for advanced versions of Nastran, an engineering simulation software program used throughout the aerospace and automotive industries. The consent order required MSC to divest at least one clone copy of its current advance Nastran through royalty-free perpetual, non-exclusive licenses to one or two acquirers approved by the Commission.

Under the terms of a consent order, The Institute of Store Planners must remove from its Code of Ethics any provision that prohibits its members from providing their services for free and any provision that prohibits competition with other members for work on the basis of price. According to the complaint, these rules unreasonably restrained price and nonprice competition among the members, depriving consumers of the benefits of competition among store planners. Its members provide architectural store design and store and merchandise planning to retail stores.