Tag: Industrial Goods

The FTC challenged Graco Inc.'s proposed $650 million acquisition of ITW Finishing LLC from Illinois Tool Works Inc., alleging that it would harm competition in the market for equipment used to apply paints and other liquid finishes to a variety of manufactured goods, such as cars, wood cabinets, and major appliances. In March 2012, the FTC issued an order requiring Graco Inc. to hold separate the worldwide liquid finishing equipment businesses of Illinois Tool Works Inc. and ITW Finishing LLC, while allowing Graco to complete its proposed $650 million acquisition of all of ITW's finishing equipment businesses. The Commission also withdrew its court challenge to the deal. On 5/31/2012, the FTC required Graco Inc., a leader in the worldwide market for key industrial finishing equipment, to sell the worldwide liquid finishing business of Illinois Tool Works Inc. and ITW Finishing LLC under a proposed order, as part of a settlement resolving charges that its $650 million acquisition of several ITW businesses would have been anticompetitive and led to higher prices and reduced innovation for the North American manufacturers who rely on this equipment.

The FTC challenged Ardagh Group, S.A.’s proposed $1.7 billion acquisition of Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc., alleging that it will reduce competition and result in the two firms – the merged firm and its only remaining significant competitor, Owens-Illinois – controlling in excess of 75 percent of the U.S. markets for glass containers for beer and spirits customers, resulting in higher prices for those customers. The FTC issued an administrative complaint against the two companies, alleging that the acquisition would violate U.S. antitrust law. The proposed acquisition would combine the second-largest manufacturer of glass containers (Saint-Gobain) and the third-largest (Ardagh).The complaint alleges that glass container competitors possess a wealth of information about each other and the glass container industry, and that reducing the number of major competitors from three to two will make it substantially easier for the remaining two competitors to coordinate with one another to achieve supracompetitive prices or other anticompetitive outcomes. The Commission also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in federal court to preserve the status quo pending the outcome of the administrative trial on the merits.  On 11/3/13, the parties stipulated to a hold separate order in the federal court proceeding.   On 11/8/13 the Commission stayed the part 3 litigation pending settlement discussions. On 4/10/14, Ardagh Group SA agreed to sell six of its nine glass container manufacturing plants in the United States to settle the FTC's charges. The FTC’s settlement order requires Ardagh to sell six of the manufacturing plants and related assets it acquired through its 2012 acquisition of Anchor Glass Container Corporation, along with Anchor’s former corporate headquarters in Tampa, Fla.

In the matter of Polypore International/Daramic LLC, the Commission issued an administrative complaint challenging Polypore’s consummated acquisition of Microporous Products in the global market for battery separators, a key component in flooded lead-acid batteries. According to the Commission’s complaint, the acquisition, which occurred in February 2008, substantially lessened competition and led to higher prices in several North American product markets including 1) deep-cycle separators used in golf carts, 2) motive separators for batteries used primarily in forklifts, 3) automotive separators used in car batteries, and 4) uninterruptible power supply (UPS) separators used in batteries that provide backup power during power outages. Additionally, the complaint alleged that Polypore engaged in anticompetitive conduct by entering into a joint marketing agreement with a competitor, restricting the competitor’s entry into the polyethylene battery separator markets. The complaint also charged that Polypore sought to maintain monopoly power through anticompetitive means in several battery separator markets. On 3/8/2010, the ALJ announced an Initial Decision finding that Polypore International Inc.’s consummated acquisition – through its Daramic Acquisition Corporation subsidiary – of rival battery separator manufacturer Microporous L.P. was anticompetitive and violated federal law in four battery separator markets in North America. In an Order filed with the Initial Decision on 2/22/2010, Judge Chappell ordered Polypore to divest Microporous to an FTC-approved buyer within six months after the divestiture provisions of the Order become final. Judge Chappell also ruled that a 2001 joint marketing agreement between Polypore and a rival battery separator manufacturer illegally divided up the markets for particular types of battery separators in North America, and ordered Polypore to amend the agreement to terminate and declare null and void the covenant not to compete. Finally, the Judge dismissed a separate allegation that Polypore engaged in exclusionary conduct in specific battery separator markets. In December of 2010, the Commission voted to uphold in large part the March 2010 Initial Decision, finding that the acquisition reduced competition in three of the four relevant markets, and ordering divestiture. Polypore subsequently filed a petition for review of the Commission's Decision and Order in the US court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. On 07/12/2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the FTC's Opinion and Order, and on 06/24/2013, the Supreme Court denied Polypore's petition for certioari. In December 2013, the FTC approved the sale of all stock and assets related to Microporous to Seven Mile Capital Partners.

The FTC challenged Ardagh Group, S.A.’s proposed $1.7 billion acquisition of Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc., alleging that it will reduce competition and result in the two firms – the merged firm and its only remaining significant competitor, Owens-Illinois – controlling in excess of 75 percent of the U.S. markets for glass containers for beer and spirits customers, resulting in higher prices for those customers. The FTC issued an administrative complaint against the two companies, alleging that the acquisition would violate U.S. antitrust law. The proposed acquisition would combine the second-largest manufacturer of glass containers (Saint-Gobain) and the third-largest (Ardagh).The complaint alleges that glass container competitors possess a wealth of information about each other and the glass container industry, and that reducing the number of major competitors from three to two will make it substantially easier for the remaining two competitors to coordinate with one another to achieve supracompetitive prices or other anticompetitive outcomes. The Commission also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in federal court to preserve the status quo pending the outcome of the administrative trial on the merits.  On 11/3/13, the parties stipulated to a hold separate order in the federal court proceeding.   On 11/8/13 the Commission stayed the part 3 litigation pending settlement discussions. On 4/10/14, Ardagh Group SA agreed to sell six of its nine glass container manufacturing plants in the United States to settle the FTC's charges. The FTC’s settlement order requires Ardagh to sell six of the manufacturing plants and related assets it acquired through its 2012 acquisition of Anchor Glass Container Corporation, along with Anchor’s former corporate headquarters in Tampa, Fla.

The FTC accepted a consent order settling charges that Charlotte Pipe and Foundry Company’s 2010 purchase of Star Pipe Products, Inc.’s cast iron soil pipe (CISP) business was anticompetitive. To help restore competition in CISP markets in the United States, the order prohibits Charlotte Pipe from enforcing a confidentiality and non-compete agreement with Star Pipe, ensures that Charlotte Pipe will publicly disclose its prior acquisitions of other CISP importers, and requires Charlotte Pipe to notify the Commission before making future acquisitions in this industry. CISP products are important components of pipeline systems used to transport wastewater from buildings to municipal sewage systems, to vent plumbing systems, and to transport rainwater to storm drains.

Houghton International, Inc., the leading North American provider of hot rolling oil used to process aluminum, agreed to sell some of the assets it acquired in 2008 through its purchase of D.A. Stuart GmbH, a transaction that included multiple product markets. The FTC’s investigation found that Houghton’s acquisition of D.A. Stuart GmbH combined the two largest suppliers of aluminum hot rolling oil (AHRO) in North America, giving the combined firm control of almost 75 percent of the North American market. The FTC’s complaint alleges that, through its purchase of Stuart, Houghton could unilaterally raise AHRO prices to U.S. consumers. The complaint also alleges that the acquisition could decrease innovation for this vital input into aluminum manufacturing. Under the order settling the FTC’s charges, Houghton will sell Stuart’s AHRO business to Quaker Chemical Corporation.

Graco, Inc. settled FTC charges that it violated the antitrust laws by buying Gusmer Corp. (Gusmer) in 2005 and GlasCraft, Inc. (GCI) in 2008, its two closest competitors in the North American market for fast set equipment (FSE) used by contractors to apply polyurethane foams and polyurea coatings. The consent order settling the FTC’s charges is designed to restore competition to the FSE market that was lost as a result of Graco’s acquisitions. It incorporates a private litigation settlement between Graco and Polyurethane Machinery Corp. (Gama/PMC) that requires Graco to license certain technology to Gama/PMC. The consent order also contains provisions that provide Gama/PMC and other competitors easier access to distributors, so they can distribute competing FSE products effectively in the North American market.

The FTC approved an order settling charges that Robert Bosch GmbH’s acquisition of the SPX Service Solutions business of SPX Corporation would have given it a virtual monopoly in the market for air conditioning recycling, recovery, and recharge devices for vehicles. Under a settlement with the FTC, Bosch agreed to sell its automotive air conditioner repair equipment business, including RTI Technologies, Inc., to automotive equipment manufacturer, Mahle Clevite, Inc. Bosch also agreed to resolve allegations that, before its acquisition by Bosch, SPX harmed competition in the market for this equipment by reneging on a commitment to license key, standard-essential patents (SEPs) on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. The FTC alleged that SPX reneged on its obligation to license on FRAND terms by seeking injunctions against willing licensees of those patents. Bosch has agreed to abandon these claims for injunctive relief. 

The FTC issued an administrative complaint  challenging electronics component manufacturer Integrated Device Technology, Inc.’s proposed $330 million acquisition of PLX Technology, Inc., a deal that allegedly would give the combined firm a near-monopoly in the market for a type of integrated computer circuits called PCIe switches, which perform critical connectivity functions in computers and other electronic devices widely used by American consumers and businesses. The Commission also authorized the staff to seek a preliminary injunction in federal district court or other relief necessary to stop the deal pending a full administrative trial, but theparties abandoned the transaction and the Commission later dismissed the complaint.

Magnesium Elektron, a leader in the production of magnesium plates used for photoengraving, settled FTC charges that its acquisition of rival plate manufacturer Revere Graphics Worldwide, Inc. was anticompetitive and a violation of the antitrust laws. The FTC's order restores the competition eliminated by the merger by requiring Magnesium Elektron to sell necessary intellectual property and technical know-how used to manufacture magnesium plates for photoengraving applications to Kansas-based Universal Engraving.  While Universal Engraving does not currently manufacture or sell magnesium plates, it is uniquely positioned to become an effective competitor in this market because it already sells other metals used in the photoengraving process to customers affected by the merger.