Skip to main content

Displaying 261 - 280 of 4388

Meta Platforms, Inc./Mark Zuckerberg/Within Unlimited, FTC v.

The Federal Trade Commission authorized a lawsuit in federal court to block the proposed merger between virtual reality (VR) giant Meta and Within Unlimited, the VR studio that markets Supernatural, a leading VR fitness app. Formerly known as Facebook Inc., Meta sells the most widely used VR headset, operates a widely used VR app store, and already owns many popular VR apps, including Beat Saber, reportedly one of the best-selling VR apps of all time, which it markets for fitness use. The agency alleges that Meta’s proposed acquisition of Within would stifle competition and dampen innovation in the dynamic, rapidly growing U.S. markets for fitness and dedicated-fitness VR apps. A federal court complaint and request for preliminary relief was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to halt the transaction.

Type of Action
Federal
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
221 0040
Docket Number
3:22-CV-04325
Case Status
Pending

Biglari Holdings Inc.

Restaurant chain owner and investment fund operator Biglari Holdings Inc. will pay a $1.4 million civil penalty to settle charges that two acquisitions it made on March 26, 2020 of shares of restaurant operator Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc. violated the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act. According to the complaint, these two acquisitions, together with Biglari’s prior holdings of Cracker Barrel, caused it to exceed an HSR filing threshold, triggering its obligation to file an HSR Form and wait before completing the acquisition. Failing to do so violated the HSR Act.

Type of Action
Federal
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
2110040

San Juan IPA, Inc.

San Juan IPA, Inc., an independent physician association in Farmington, New Mexico, has agreed to pay a $263,000 civil penalty to the FTC to settle allegations that it violated a 2005 order. The 2005 case alleged that San Juan IPA orchestrated agreements among competing member physicians to coordinate joint pricing, collectively negotiated contracts with payors on behalf of members, and refused to deal with payors except on collectively determined price terms.

To remedy these allegations, the 2005 order prohibited San Juan from, among other things, entering into, maintaining, enforcing, or facilitating any agreement or understanding among any physicians (1) to negotiate on behalf of any physician with any payor, (2) to deal, refuse to deal, or threaten to refuse to deal with any payor, (3) regarding any term upon which any physician deals with a payor, including price terms, and (4) not to deal individually with any payor or not to deal with a payor except through the IPA. The order also prohibited San Juan from attempting to engage in, or encouraging any person to engage in, any prohibited action.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
Case Status
Pending