Skip to main content

Displaying 2181 - 2200 of 4394

Concordia Healthcare / Par Pharmaceutical, In the Matter of

Pharmaceutical companies Concordia Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. settled FTC charges that they entered into an unlawful agreement not to compete in the sale of generic versions of Kapvay, a prescription drug used to treat Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. As part of the settlement, the companies agreed not to enforce the anticompetitive provisions of their agreement. Until May 15, 2015, Concordia and Par were the only two firms permitted by the FDA to market generic Kapvay. Rather than competing against one another, Concordia agreed not to sell an authorized generic version of Kapvay in exchange for a share of Par’s revenues. Under the terms of the settlements, Concordia is prohibited from enforcing the anticompetitive provisions of its agreement with Par, including the profit-sharing provisions, and Par is prohibited from enforcing provisions that bar Concordia from agreeing not to sell an authorized generic version of Kapvay. Concordia began selling generic Kapvay after learning of the FTC’s investigation.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
151 0030

Coca-Cola Company, The, In the Matter of

As part of a settlement, The Coca-Cola Company agreed to restrict its access to confidential competitive business information of rival Dr Pepper Snapple Group as a condition for completing Coca-Cola’s proposed $12.3 billion acquisition of its largest North American bottler, which also distributes Dr Pepper Snapple carbonated soft drinks. In a complaint filed with the settlement, the FTC charged that access to cmmercially sensitive information likely would have harmed competition in the U.S. markets for carbonated soft drinks.Under the settlement with the FTC, Coca-Cola will set up a “firewall” to ensure that its ownership of the bottling company does not give certain Coca-Cola employees access to commercially sensitive confidential Dr Pepper Snapple marketing information and brand plans.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
101 0107

Pfizer Inc./Hospira, Inc., In the Matter of

Pfizer Inc. agreed to sell the rights and assets related to four pharmaceutical products in order to settle FTC charges that its proposed $16 billion acquisition of Hospira, Inc. would likely be anticompetitive. Pfizer is one of the world’s largest drug companies and principally competes with Hospira in markets for certain sterile injectable pharmaceutical products. The order requires Pfizer to supply Alvogen with the clindamycin phosphate injection product for three years while Pfizer transfers the manufacturing technology to Alvogen or its designee. Pfizer also is required to provide transitional services to Alvogen to assist with establishing manufacturing capabilities and securing FDA approvals to market all of the divested products.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
151 0074
Docket Number
C-4537

Steris/Synergy Health, In the Matter of

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.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
151 0032
Docket Number
9365