Tag: Nonmerger

A consent order prohibits fourteen Bakersfield, California pool construction contractors from entering into any agreement or conspiracy to substantially raise and set swimming pool construction prices. The order also prohibits the contractors from refusing to deal with owner-builders or home construction contractors or developers.

Physicians practicing in the North and South Lake Tahoe areas settled charges that they conspired to fix the prices and terms for professional services. The consent order prohibits the IPA from engaging in collective negotiations to fix prices; refusing to deal with third party payers; and coercing payers into accepting PA fee schedules and minimum reimbursement rates.

A Colorado physicians' organization settled charges alleging that the Mesa County IPA conspired with its members to increase prices for physician services and thereby prevented third party payers such as preferred provider organizations, health maintenance organizations, and employer health care purchasing cooperatives from offering alternative health insurance programs to consumers in Mesa County.

A pharmacy association in northern Puerto Rico and Ricardo Alvarez Class settled charges that they engaged in an illegal boycott in an attempt to obtain higher reimbursement rates for pharmacy goods and services under the government's managed care plan for the indigent. The consent order prohibits the members of the association and Mr. Class from engaging in joint negotiations for prices and from threatening to boycott or refusing to provide pharmacy services.

An association of marine pilots in Oregon agreed to settle charges that it monopolized and unreasonably restrained competition in the market for pilotage services on the Columbia River. The consent order prohibits Columbia River Pilots, a group of approximately 40 marine pilots licensed by the state of Oregon to provide navigational assistance to vessels on the Columbia River, from imposing unreasonable noncompete agreements on its members, allocating customers with any competing pilotage group, limiting any competing pilotage group's size, or restricting exclusive dealing contracts or rate proposals.

An association of 25 automobile dealerships settled charges that they agreed to boycott Chrysler if the manufacturer continued to allocate vehicles based on total sales. Competing dealers marketed vehicles offering lower prices on the Internet and were taking substantial sales from other dealers in the Northwest. The consent order prohibits the dealers from threatening to enter into any boycott or refusal to deal with any automobile manufacturer or consumer.

Consent order prohibits the association from entering into agreements that restrict its members from posting or advertising room rates for lodgings in the South Lake Tahoe area of Northern California and Nevada.

Dentists in three communities in Puerto Rico settled charges that they refused to provide dental services under the government's managed care plan for the indigent unless they received certain prices. Under the terms of the consent order, the dentists are prohibited from jointly boycotting or refusing to deal with any third party payer to obtain higher reimbursement rates for dental services.

A group of physicians in the area of Lake Charles, Louisiana settled charges that they illegally conspired to fix the prices for professional services by engaging in joint price negotiations with third-party payers. The final consent order prohibits such practices but does allow the MDP to engage in legitimate joint conduct.

A final order prohibits five institutional pharmacies from engaging in any joint price negotiation or price agreements for the provision of prescription drugs in an attempt to maximize reimbursement rates with managed care organizations.

The FTC charged that Fastline Publications, Inc., a Kentucky publisher, and Mid-America Equipment Retailers Association, an Indiana trade association representing farm equipment dealers harmed competition when the publisher entered into agreements with the dealers to ban price advertising for new equipment in an attempt not to disclose those dealers who offered discounted prices.  According to the FTC, the agreements reduced competition among farm equipment dealers and deprived consumers of truthful and nondeceptive price information. The agreement to settle the charges prohibited Fastline and Mid-America from restricting the advertising of prices for farm equipment in the future.

The consent order settled charges that Ethyl and The Associated Octel Company Ltd. entered into an agreement whereby Ethyl agreed to stop manufacturing lead antiknock compounds and, in return, Octel agreed to supply Ethyl with a limited volume of lead antiknock compounds. The complaint issued with the consent order charged that the agreement eliminated competition between the two firms. Under the terms of the consent order, Octel must modify the agreement with Ethyl to remove price and volume restrictions and both firms are prohibited from disclosing to one another the prices that they charge their customers.