Skip to main content

Displaying 1 - 20 of 534

Amazon.com, Inc. (Amazon eCommerce)

The Federal Trade Commission, 18 state attorneys general, and Puerto Rico sued Amazon alleging that the online retail and technology company is a monopolist that uses a set of interlocking anticompetitive and unfair strategies to illegally maintain its monopoly power. The FTC and its state partners say Amazon’s actions allow it to stop rivals and sellers from lowering prices, degrade quality for shoppers, overcharge sellers, stifle innovation, and prevent rivals from fairly competing against Amazon. 

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
1910129
1910130

Syngenta and Corteva, FTC v.

The Federal Trade Commission and state partners have filed a complaint in federal court alleging that pesticide manufacturers Syngenta Crop Protection and Corteva, Inc. have used so-called “loyalty” programs to block and restrict generic competition from pesticide markets, leaving farmers to pay elevated prices for crop protection. The complaint seeks to bar Syngenta and Corteva from continuing these programs and from entering into any similar arrangements in the future, and to restore competition to affected markets.

Type of Action
Federal
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
191 0031
Case Status
Pending

Surescripts LLC

The FTC sued the health information company Surescripts, alleging that the company employed illegal vertical and horizontal restraints in order to maintain its monopolies over two electronic prescribing, or “e-prescribing,” markets: routing and eligibility.  According to the complaint, Surescripts monopolized two separate markets for e-prescription services: The market for routing e-prescriptions, which uses technology that enables health care providers to send electronic prescriptions directly to pharmacies; and the market for determining eligibility, a separate service that enables health care providers to electronically determine patients’ eligibility for prescription coverage through access to insurance coverage and benefits information, usually through a pharmacy benefit manager.The FTC alleges that Surescripts intentionally set out to keep e-prescription routing and eligibility customers on both sides of each market from using additional platforms (a practice known as multihoming) using anticompetitive exclusivity agreements, threats, and other exclusionary tactics. Among other things, the FTC alleges that Surescripts took steps to increase the costs of routing and eligibility multihoming through loyalty and exclusivity contracts.

In July 2023, the FTC filed a proposed order that would resolve the Commission’s charges. The proposed order prohibits Surescripts from engaging in exclusionary conduct and executing or enforcing non-compete agreements with current and former employees. The proposed order also goes beyond routing and eligibility, extending the same prohibitions to Surescripts’ medication history services and the company’s on-demand formulary services.

Type of Action
Federal
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
141 0210