Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

American Air Liquide Holdings, Inc. and Airgas, Inc., agreed to divest certain production and distribution assets to settle charges that their proposed $13.4 billion merger likely would have harmed competition and led to higher prices in several U.S. and regional markets. The companies will sell assets used to produce and supply seven types of industrial gas: bulk oxygen, bulk nitrogen, bulk argon, bulk nitrous oxide, bulk liquid carbon dioxide, dry ice, and packaged welding gases sold in retail stores. These gases are used in a number of industries, including oil and gas, steelmaking, health care, and food manufacturing, according to the complaint. Under the proposed settlement order, Air Liquide will sell these assets to a Commission-approved buyer within four months after it acquires Airgas. The proposed consent agreement includes an asset maintenance order to ensure that Air Liquide and Airgas continue to act independently and maintain the relevant assets until they are divested.

In May 2014, the Federal Trade Commission sued a Florida-based operation that it alleged capitalized on the green coffee diet fad by using bogus weight loss claims and fake news websites to market the dietary supplement Pure Green Coffee.

In November 2016, at the request of the FTC, a U.S. district court judge issued a summary decision and $30 million judgment against the pitchman behind the operation.

The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division, ruled that Nicholas Scott Congleton deceptively marketed Pure Green Coffee for weight loss through NPB Advertising, Inc. and a web of other companies under his control. The court order permanently bars him from the deceptive advertising practices challenged by the Commission.

In March 2025, the FTC sent more than $905,000 in refunds to consumers who bought Pure Green Coffee.

Investment trust Caledonia Investments plc agreed to pay $480,000 in civil penalties to resolve charges that it violated federal premerger reporting laws by failing to report its purchase in 2014 of voting shares in the helicopter services company Bristow Group, Inc. According to the complaint, in June 2008, Caledonia first acquired voting shares in Bristow and reported its purchase to U.S. antitrust authorities, as required under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act. Subsequently, Caledonia made additional purchases that were exempt from reporting under HSR rules. During that same timeframe, however, two Caledonia employees were designated to serve on Bristow’s board. Bristow awards restricted-stock voting securities to its board members, and by agreement, it set aside the securities for the two Caledonia board members for purchase by Caledonia. In February 2014, these voting shares vested, and Caledonia acquired them, according to the complaint. The Commission charged that Caledonia was required under the HSR Act to report this purchase but failed to do so. The HSR Act allows a company that has reported an initial purchase of voting shares to purchase additional voting shares from the same issuer – as long as those purchases do not cause the company’s total holdings to cross a higher reporting threshold over a five-year period following the initial purchase. The complaint charges that Caledonia’s 2014 purchase of voting shares in Bristow fell outside the five-year period following its initial purchase.