Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

In August 2023, the FTC approved a proposed consent order to resolve antitrust concerns surrounding Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.’s (ICE) proposed $13.1 billion acquisition of Black Knight, Inc. The proposed settlement ensures Black Knight’s divestiture of Empower and Optimal Blue, two businesses that provide critical services in the mortgage origination process. The FTC also secured other concessions to promote the success of the divested businesses. On November 3, 2023, the FTC approved the final consent order.  

The Federal Trade Commission filed an administrative complaint alleging that Altria Group, Inc. and JUUL Labs, Inc. entered a series of agreements, including Altria’s acquisition of a 35% stake in JUUL, that eliminated competition in violation of federal antitrust laws. According to the complaint, this series of agreements involved Altria ceasing to compete in the U.S. market for closed-system electronic cigarettes in return for a substantial ownership interest in JUUL, by far the dominant player in that market. In an initial decision announced on Feb. 24, 2022, Chief Administrative Law Judge D. Michael Chappell dismissed the antitrust charges in the complaint.

The FTC is suing Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Endo International plc, Impax Laboratories, LLC, and Impax’s owner, Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc., alleging that a 2017 agreement between Endo and Impax violated the antitrust laws by eliminating competition in the market for oxymorphone ER. The complaint charges the defendants with violating Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, which constitutes unfair methods of competition in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act. Specifically, Endo, Impax, and Amneal are charged with entering into an illegal agreement in restraint of trade, and Amneal is charged with monopolization of the oxymorphone ER market. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Jan. 25, 2021.

7-Eleven, Inc. and Marathon Petroleum Corporation have agreed to divest retail fuel assets used to sell gasoline and diesel fuel in 293 local markets across 20 states, to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that 7-Eleven’s acquisition of Marathon’s Speedway subsidiary violated federal antitrust laws. The complaint alleges that the acquisition will harm competition for the retail sale of fuel in 293 local markets across Arizona; California; Florida; Illinois; Indiana; Kentucky; Massachusetts; Michigan; North Carolina; New Hampshire; Nevada; New York; Ohio; Pennsylvania; Rhode Island; South Carolina; Tennessee; Utah; Virginia, and West Virginia. In addition to the divestitures, the proposed order prohibits 7-Eleven from enforcing any noncompete provisions as to any franchisees or employees working at or doing business with the divested assets. On November 10, 2021, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.

The Federal Trade Commission sued 7-Eleven, Inc and its parent company, Seven & i Holdings Co., Ltd., alleging the convenience store chain violated a 2018 FTC consent order by acquiring a fuel outlet in St. Petersburg, Fla. without providing the Commission prior notice.

The Federal Trade Commission filed an administrative complaint against the Louisiana Real Estate Appraisers Board, alleging that the group is unreasonably restraining price competition for appraisal services in Louisiana, contrary to federal antitrust law. The complaint alleged that the appraisal board’s regulations exceeded the scope of the mandate outlined in the Dodd-Frank Act that required appraisal management companies to pay “a rate that is customary and reasonable for appraisal services performed in the market area of the property being appraised.” Specifically, the board required appraisal fees to equal or exceed the median fees identified in survey reports commissioned and published by the board. The board then investigated and sanctioned companies that paid fees below the specified levels. 

Shortly before the administrative trial was set to begin, the FTC and the board reached a proposed settlement agreement.

On April 5, 2022, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.

Global Partners LP and Richard Wiehl have agreed to divest to Petroleum Marketing Investment Group, LLC, seven stores that sell gasoline and diesel fuel in five local markets in Connecticut, to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that Global’s proposed acquisition of 27 retail gasoline and diesel outlets owned or operated by Wiehl violates federal antitrust laws. The complaint alleges that the acquisition will harm competition for the retail sale of gasoline in and around the Connecticut towns and cities of Fairfield, Bethel, Milford, Wilton, and Shelton. In all of these local markets except Wilton, the acquisition will also harm competition for the retail sale of diesel fuel. Under the terms of the proposed consent order, among other stipulations, Global and Wiehl must divest to Petroleum Marketing Investment Group six Global retail fuel outlets and one Wheels retail fuel outlet. On March 3, 2022, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.

Medical device company Boston Scientific Corp. agreed to divest certain assets to Varian Medical Systems to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that Boston Scientific’s proposed $4.2 billion acquisition of medical equipment and pharmaceutical supplier BTG plc would violate federal antitrust law. According to the complaint, Boston Scientific’s acquisition of BTG would harm consumers in the U.S. market for drug eluting beads, or DEBs, which are microscopic beads used to treat certain liver cancers. Interventional radiologists use DEBs, combined with chemotherapy drugs, in a procedure called transarterial chemoembolization. Under the proposed settlement agreement, Boston Scientific was required to divest to Varian its DEB business, as well as its bland bead product line. Bland beads are used in another type of procedure to block the flow of blood to a liver tumor. On Feb. 18, 2022, the Commission announced modifications to the divestiture agreement with Boston Scientific Corp.

In 2020, Danaher Corporation agreed to divest assets to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that its proposed $21.4 billion acquisition of General Electric’s biopharmaceutical business, GE Biopharma, would violate federal antitrust law. Sartorius Stedim Biotech S.A. is the approved divestiture buyer. Sartorius agreed to obtain the Commission’s prior approval if it proposed to acquire Novasep Process SAS’s chromatography equipment business. On Feb. 1, 2022, the Commission announced that it granted Sartorius’s petition to proceed with this acquisition.

Global Partners LP and Richard Wiehl have agreed to divest to Petroleum Marketing Investment Group, LLC, seven stores that sell gasoline and diesel fuel in five local markets in Connecticut, to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that Global’s proposed acquisition of 27 retail gasoline and diesel outlets owned or operated by Wiehl violates federal antitrust laws. The complaint alleges that the acquisition will harm competition for the retail sale of gasoline in and around the Connecticut towns and cities of Fairfield, Bethel, Milford, Wilton, and Shelton. In all of these local markets except Wilton, the acquisition will also harm competition for the retail sale of diesel fuel. Under the terms of the proposed consent order, among other stipulations, Global and Wiehl must divest to Petroleum Marketing Investment Group six Global retail fuel outlets and one Wheels retail fuel outlet.

To settle FTC charges that its actions violated the antitrust laws, the Board of Dental Examiners of Alabama agreed to stop requiring on-site supervision by licensed dentists of alignment scans of prospective patients’ mouths seeking to address misaligned teeth or gaps between teeth. According to the complaint, the board amended a rule to prohibit dental hygienists and other non-dentist practitioners from performing scans inside a patient’s mouth without on-site dentist supervision. The complaint alleges that the Board unreasonably excluded from competition providers of teledentistry-based teeth alignment products and services, and that it did this without adequate active supervision from neutral state officials, in violation of the FTC Act. On Dec. 21, 2021, the FTC announced the final consent agreement in this matter.

Following a public comment period, the Federal Trade Commission has approved a final order settling charges that three PET resin producers’ proposed $1.1 billion joint acquisition out of bankruptcy of an under-construction PET production facility would violate federal antitrust law.

Pharmaceutical and biologic manufacturers Bristol-Myers Squibb Company and Celgene Corporation agreed to divest Celgene’s Otezla, the most popular oral treatment in the United States for moderate-to-severe psoriasis, for $13.4 billion. The divestiture settled Federal Trade Commission charges that BMS’s proposed $74 billion acquisition of Celgene would violate federal antitrust law. Under the terms of the proposed consent order, the parties were required to divest Celgene’s worldwide Otezla business – including its regulatory approvals, intellectual property, contracts, and inventory – to Amgen, Inc. no later than 10 days after consummating the proposed acquisition. On Nov. 12, 2021, the Commission  announced that it has approved certain modifications to Bristol Meyers Squibb’s divestiture agreements.

To settle FTC charges that its actions violated the antitrust laws, the Board of Dental Examiners of Alabama agreed to stop requiring on-site supervision by licensed dentists of alignment scans of prospective patients’ mouths seeking to address misaligned teeth or gaps between teeth. According to the complaint, the board amended a rule to prohibit dental hygienists and other non-dentist practitioners from performing scans inside a patient’s mouth without on-site dentist supervision. The complaint alleges that the Board unreasonably excluded from competition providers of teledentistry-based teeth alignment products and services, and that it did this without adequate active supervision from neutral state officials, in violation of the FTC Act.