Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

In November 2008, the Commission issued an administrative complaint charging that the acquisition of CCC Information Services by Mitchell International, a transaction valued at $1.4 billion, would be anticompetitive in the market for “estimatics”, a database system used by auto insurers and repair shops to generate repair estimates for consumers. According to the complaint, the transaction would also harm competition in the market for total loss valuation (TLV) systems, used to inform consumers when their vehicle has been totaled. The transaction would create a new entity with well over half of the market share for these systems, allowing for unilateral price increases, and facilitating coordination among the remaining smaller competitors in the market. The Commission concurrently authorized staff to file a complaint in Federal District Court. On March 9, 2009, the US District Court for the District of Columbia ordered a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order preventing the parties from consummating the transaction pending a full administrative trial on the merits. On March 13, 2009, since the respondents announced that they decided not to proceed with the proposed merger the Commission dismissed the Administrative Complaint.

In November 2008, the Commission authorized staff to file a complaint in Federal District Court, charging that the acquisition of CCC Information Services by Mitchell International, a transaction valued at $1.4 billion, would be anticompetitive in the market for “estimatics”, a database system used by auto insurers and repair shops to generate repair estimates for consumers. According to the complaint, the transaction would also harm competition in the market for total loss valuation (TLV) systems, used to inform consumers when their vehicle has been totaled. The transaction would create a new entity with well over half of the market share for these systems, allowing for unilateral price increases, and facilitating coordination among the remaining smaller competitors in the market. The Commission concurrently issued an administrative complaint. On March 9, 2009, the US District Court for the District of Columbia ordered a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order preventing the parties from consummating the transaction pending a full administrative trial on the merits. On March 13, 2009, since the respondents announced that they decided not to proceed with the proposed merger the Commission dismissed the Administrative Complaint.

The Commission challenged Flow International Corporation’s proposed $109 million acquisition of rival waterjet manufacturer OMAX Corporation. Both corporations develop, manufacture, and sell computerized waterjet cutting systems which use pressurized water mixed with abrasive garnet particles to cut various materials, including steel and stone. The proposed acquisition would have united the two largest competitors in the market for the manufacture and sale of computerized waterjet cutting systems and allowed Flow to exercise market power and increase prices. Furthermore, the Commission charged that entry would be very unlikely because OMAX received two broad patents relating to the control systems for waterjet cutting systems. The Commission approved a consent agreement requiring OMAX to grant any request for a royalty-free license for its controller patents.

The Commission authorized both an administrative complaint and a motion for a preliminary injunction to challenge the proposed merger of Inova Health System Foundation’s and Prince William Health System (PWHS), alleging that the acquisition would violate federal antitrust laws by reducing competition for general acute care inpatient hospital services in Northern Virginia. On June 17, 2008 the Commission approved an order dismissing its administrative complaint, as the respondents publicly announced their mutual decision to terminate the proposed acquisition agreement.

The Commission intervened in the formation of United Launch Alliance (ULA), a proposed joint venture between the Boeing Corp. and Lockheed Martin Corp. The FTC’s complaint alleged that the formation of ULA as originally structured would have reduced competition in the markets for U.S. government medium to heavy launch services and space vehicles. In settling the Commissions’ charges, the parties agreed to take certain actions (such as nondiscrimination requirements and firewalls) to address ancillary competitive harms not inextricably tied to the national security benefits of ULA.