Tag: Nonmerger

A Puerto Rican cooperative of pharmacy owners, Cooperativa de Farmacias Puertorriqueñas, known as "Coopharma," agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it harmed competition by negotiating, entering into, and implementing agreements among its member pharmacies to fix prices on which they contract with insurers and pharmacy benefit managers. In settling the charges, Coopharma has agreed not to engage in such conduct in the future. Following a public comment period, the Federal Trade Commission has approved a petition by Cooperativa De Farmacias Puertorriqueñas, a Puerto Rican cooperative of independent pharmacy owners, to reopen and modify the FTC’s 2012 final order.  

The FTC filed separate complaints against the three largest U.S. suppliers of ductile iron pipe fittings, which are used in municipal water systems around the United States. The FTC charged that the three companies, McWane, Inc., Star Pipe Products, Ltd., and Sigma Corporation, illegally conspired to set and maintain prices for pipe fittings, and that McWane illegally maintained its monopoly power in the market for U.S.-made pipe fittings by implementing an exclusive dealing policy. Sigma settled the FTC's charges prior to litigation (final order dated Feb. 27, 2012); Star settled soon after (final order dated May 8, 2012).  The complaint against McWane was heard before an administrative law judge and later appealed to the Commission; see Docket No. 9351.

Pool Corporation, the largest distributor of swimming pool products in the United States, agreed to stop anticompetitive tactics that it allegedly used to keep out new competitors in local markets around the nation, as part of a settlement that resolves charges that the conduct maintained PoolCorp's monopoly over distribution of pool products. PoolCorp distributes products used in the construction, renovation, repair, service, and maintenance of residential and commercial swimming pools. The FTC charged that for the past eight years, PoolCorp, based in Covington, Louisiana, threatened not to sell the pool products of any manufacturer who sold products to a new distributor, effectively thwarting entry by new competitors by blocking them from buying pool products directly from manufacturers. The strategy significantly raised the costs incurred by its rivals, thereby lowering sales, increasing prices, and reducing the number of choices available to consumers, the agency alleged.

An association representing 900 physicians in the Amarillo, Texas, area agreed to a Commission order barring it from jointly negotiating the prices it charges insurance providers. The FTC alleged in a complaint filed with the order that the association, Southwest Health Alliances, Inc., d/b/a BSA Provider Network, has violated federal law since 2000 by fixing the prices its member doctors would charge insurers. The Commission's order requires the association to cease and desist.

In May 1996, the Commission filed an administrative complaint charging Toys "R" Us with using its dominant position as a toy distributor to obtain agreements from toy manufacturers to stop selling to warehouse clubs the same toys that they sold to Toys "R" Us.  After an administrative trial, the ALJ issued an initial decision finding that Toys "R' Us' policy to stop carrying toys made by a manufacturer that sold the same toys to discount club stores had induced manufacturers to agree to stop supplying some toys to club stores in violation of the antitrust laws.  In October 1998, the Commission issued its decision that Toys "R Us had orchestrated horizontal and vertical agreements with and among toy manufacturers to restrict the availability of popular toys to warehouse clubs, and ordered the company to stop pressuring manufacturers to limit supply or otherwise refuse to sell to discount club stores. Toys "R" Us appealed to the Seventh Circuit, and in August 2000, the appellate court upheld the Commission's order.

In April 2014, on a petition from Toys "R" Us, the Commission modified its order to set aside certain provisions that restricted the company's ability to enter into certain conditional supply relationships, finding that Toys "R" Us is no longer the largest toy retailer.