Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

The FTC issued an administrative complaint and authorized staff to seek a preliminary injunction to enjoin the transaction pending the results of the administrative proceeding, charging that Staples, Inc.’s proposed $6.3 billion acquisition of Office Depot, Inc. would  significantly reduce competition nationwide in the market for “consumable” office supplies sold to large business customers for their own use. The complaint alleges that, in competing for contracts, both Staples and Office Depot can provide the low prices, nationwide distribution and combination of services and features that many large business customers require. The complaint further alleges that, by eliminating the competition between Staples and Office Depot, the transaction would lead to higher prices and reduced quality, and that entry or expansion into the market – by other office supplies vendors, manufacturers, wholesalers, or online retailers – would not be timely, likely, or sufficient to counteract the anticompetitive effects of the merger. On May 19, 2016, Staples and Office Depot abandoned their proposed merger after the district court granted the Commission’s request for a preliminary injunction. FTC dismissed the case from administrative trial process.

The FTC issued an administrative complaint and authorized staff to seek a preliminary injunction to enjoin the transaction pending the results of the administrative proceeding, charging that Staples, Inc.’s proposed $6.3 billion acquisition of Office Depot, Inc. would  significantly reduce competition nationwide in the market for “consumable” office supplies sold to large business customers for their own use. The complaint alleges that, in competing for contracts, both Staples and Office Depot can provide the low prices, nationwide distribution and combination of services and features that many large business customers require. The complaint further alleges that, by eliminating the competition between Staples and Office Depot, the transaction would lead to higher prices and reduced quality, and that entry or expansion into the market – by other office supplies vendors, manufacturers, wholesalers, or online retailers – would not be timely, likely, or sufficient to counteract the anticompetitive effects of the merger. On May 19, 2016, Staples and Office Depot abandoned their proposed merger after the district court granted the Commission’s request for a preliminary injunction. FTC dismissed the case from administrative trial process.

The FTC filed a complaint in federal district court alleging that Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and several other drug companies violated antitrust laws by using pay-for-delay settlements to block consumers’ access to lower-cost generic versions of Opana ER and Lidoderm with an agreement not to market an authorized generic – often called a “no-AG commitment” – as a form of reverse payment. The complaint, filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleges that Endo paid the first generic companies that filed for FDA approval – Impax Laboratories, Inc. and Watson Laboratories, Inc. – to eliminate the risk of competition for Opana ER and Lidoderm, in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act. Opana ER is an extendedrelease opioid used to relieve moderate to severe pain. Lidoderm is a topical patch used to relieve pain associated with post-herpetic neuralgia, a complication of shingles. The FTC is seeking a court judgment declaring that the defendants’ conduct violates the antitrust laws, ordering the companies to disgorge their ill-gotten gains, and permanently barring them from engaging in similar anticompetitive behavior in the future.  Teikoko Pharma USA and Teikoku Seiyaku Co., Ltd. agreed to a stipulated order resolving FTC charges.

In November 2016, the FTC voluntarily dismissed the complaint in this action.  On January 23, 2017, the FTC refiled charges related to the Lidoderm agreements in federal court in California (Federal Trade Commission vs. Allergan plc; Watson Laboratories, Inc., et al) and refiled charges related to the Opana ER agreement in a Part 3 administrative proceeding.  (In re Impax Laboratories, Inc.)

Mylan N.V. agreed to sell the rights and assets related to seven generic drugs in order to settle FTC charges that its proposed acquisition of Perrigo Company plc would be substantially reduce competition in the markets for those drugs if the merger proceeded as originally proposed. 

The FTC issued an administrative complaint charging that Steris Corporation’s proposed $1.9 billion acquisition of Synergy Health plc would violate the antitrust laws by significantly reducing future competition in regional markets for sterilization of products using radiation, particularly gamma or x-ray radiation. The Commission also authorized agency staff to seek a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in federal court to maintain the status quo pending an administrative trial on the merits. According to the FTC, it is unlikely that new competitors in the market for contract radiation sterilization services would replicate the competition that would be eliminated by the merger. The Commission alleged that the challenged acquisition would eliminate likely future competition between Steris’s gamma sterilization facilities and Synergy’s planned x-ray sterilization facilities in the United States, thus depriving customers of an alternative sterilization service and additional competition. On September 25, 2015 the district court denied the FTC motion for a PI. On October 30, the Commission dismissed the administrative complaint.