Skip to main content

Displaying 41 - 60 of 123

Sherwin-Williams/Valspar, In the Matter of

The Sherwin-Williams Company agreed to settle charges that its proposed $11.3 billion acquisition of Valspar Corporation is likely anticompetitive by selling Valspar’s North America Industrial Wood Coatings Business to Axalta Coating Systems Ltd. The transaction would combine Sherwin-Williams and Valspar, two of the top three industrial wood coatings manufacturers. According to the complaint, the acquisition as originally proposed likely would reduce competition in the North American market for industrial wood coatings used to make furniture, kitchen cabinets, and building products. Under the terms of the consent agreement, Sherwin-Williams will divest to Axalta two Valspar industrial wood coatings plants, one in High Point, North Carolina, and the other in Cornwall, Ontario. Axalta will also receive the research and development facilities, warehouses and testing facilities of Valspar’s Industrial Wood Coatings Business, as well as customer contracts, intellectual property, inventory, accounts receivable, government licenses and permits, and business records.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
161 0116

Holcim Ltd. and Lafarge S.A., In the Matter of

Holcim Ltd. and Lafarge S.A. agreed to divest plants, terminals, and a quarry to settle FTC charges that their proposed $25 billion merger creating the world’s largest cement manufacturer would likely harm competition in the United States. According to a complaint filed by the FTC, the merger of Holcim, a Swiss company, and Paris-based Lafarge, would have harmed competition in 12 regional markets for portland cement, an essential ingredient in making concrete, and in two additional regional markets for slag cement, a specialty cement used for making more durable concrete structures. Because cement products are heavy and relatively cheap, transportation costs limit their markets to local or regional areas. The FTC staff cooperated closely with the Canadian Competition Bureau (“CCB”) throughout this investigation.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
141 0129

Emerson Electric and Pentair, In the Matter of

Emerson Electric Co. agreed to sell the switchbox business of Pentair plc to Stamford, Conn.-based Crane Co. in order to settle charges that Emerson’s proposed $3.15 billion acquisition of Pentair would violate federal antitrust law. Emerson and Pentair are manufacturers of industrial valves and control products, including switchboxes, which are widely used in the oil and gas, chemical, petrochemical, power, and other industries. Switchboxes perform a critical safety function, so brand reputation and product reliability are very important to customers. Emerson’s TopWorx and Pentair’s Westlock switchboxes are the most widely-used brands nationwide and, for many customers, the only acceptable brands of switchboxes. Under the FTC order, Emerson must divest Westlock Controls Corporation, the Pentair subsidiary that designs, manufactures, and sells switchboxes, to Crane Co. The order requires Emerson to provide Crane all of Westlock’s production facilities, intellectual property, confidential business information, and the opportunity to hire Westlock employees.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
161 0221
Docket Number
C-4615

HeidelbergCement AG and Italcementi S.p.A., In the Matter of

German cement producer HeidelbergCement AG and Italian producer Italcementi S.p.A. agreed to divest a cement plant in Martinsburg, WV and up to 11 cement distribution terminals in six other states to settle charges that their proposed $4.2 billion merger would likely harm competition in five regional markets for cement in the United States. Heidelberg and Italcementi are the second and fourth largest producers of cement in the world, and in the United States, the two companies compete through their respective U.S. subsidiaries, Lehigh Hanson and Essroc Cement Corp., to sell portland cement – an essential ingredient in making concrete. According to the FTC complaint, the merger as proposed would harm competition for portland cement in five metropolitan areas: Baltimore-Washington, DC; Richmond, Virginia; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, Virginia; Syracuse, New York; and Indianapolis, Indiana. In each of these markets, the FTC alleges the merger as originally proposed would have reduced the number of competitively significant suppliers from three to two. The proposed consent agreement requires the merged company to divest to an FTC-approved buyer an Essroc cement plant and quarry in Martinsburg, West Virginia; seven Essroc terminals in Maryland, Virginia and Pennsylvania; and a Lehigh terminal in Solvay, New York. At the buyer’s option, the order also requires the merged company to divest two additional Essroc terminals in Ohio. Under the proposed order, these divestitures must occur within 120 days after the merger is complete. In addition, the merged company has ten days after the merger is complete to divest Essroc’s terminal in Indianapolis to Cemex, Inc.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
151 0200
Docket Number
C-4579

ZF Friedrichshafen and TRW Automotive, In the Matter of

Two of the world’s largest auto parts suppliers, ZF Friedrichshafen AG and TRW Automotive Holdings Corp., agreed to divest TRW's linkage and suspension business in North America and Europe, to settle FTC charges that their proposed $12.4 billion merger would likely harm competition in the North American market for heavy vehicle tie rods. Under the consent agreement, the combined company is required to divest TRW’s North American and European linkage and suspension business for heavy and light vehicles (which includes heavy vehicle tie rods). The business includes five manufacturing plants in Michigan, Canada, the Czech Republic, and Germany, and leased space in a research and development lab in Germany. At the divestiture buyer’s request, ZF must provide transition services for logistical and administrative support as well as transitional supply agreements for key manufacturing inputs needed to fulfill existing customer contracts.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
141 0235
Docket Number
C-4520

Panasonic Corporation and Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd., In the Matter of

The Commission challenged major consumer electronics manufacturers Panasonic Corporation's proposed $9 billion acquisition of Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd., requiring that Sanyo sell its portable nickel metal hydride (NiMH) battery business related assets, including a premier manufacturing plant in Japan. NiMH batteries power two-way radios, among other products, which are used by police and fire departments nationwide.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
091 0050
Docket Number
C-4274

McWane, Inc., and Star Pipe Products, Ltd., In the Matter of

The FTC filed separate complaints against the three largest U.S. suppliers of ductile iron pipe fittings, which are used in municipal water systems around the United States. The FTC charged that the three companies, McWane, Inc., Star Pipe Products, Ltd., and Sigma Corporation, illegally conspired to set and maintain prices for pipe fittings, and that McWane illegally maintained its monopoly power in the market for U.S.-made pipe fittings by implementing an exclusive dealing policy. Sigma settled the FTC's charges prior to litigation (final order dated Feb. 27, 2012); Star settled soon after (final order dated May 8, 2012).  On 5/9/2013, Chief Administrative Law Judge D. Michael Chappell dismissed charges that McWane illegally conspired with its competitors to raise and stabilize DIPF prices but found that McWane violated the antitrust laws when it excluded competitors from the market for U.S. made DIPF (domestic DIPF). On 5/13/2013, both parties filed notices of appeal of the Initial Decision. On February 6, 2014, the Commission issued a decision finding that McWane unlawfully maintained its monopoly in the domestic fittings market through its "Full Support Program", which foreclosed potential entrants from accessing distributors. The Commission's order bars McWane from requiring exclusivity from its customers. On April 17, 2015, the Eleventh Circuit upheld the Commission's order.

 

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
101 0080b
Docket Number
9351