Skip to main content

Displaying 261 - 280 of 1924

JAB Consumer Partners/VIPW/Ethos Veterinary Health, In the Matter of

The FTC imposed strict limits on JAB Consumer Partners’ future acquisitions of specialty and emergency veterinary clinics as a condition of JAB’s proposed $1.65 billion acquisition of VIPW, LLC, the parent of Ethos, an owner and operator of specialty and emergency veterinary clinics. The Commission alleged that the acquisition was likely to be anticompetitive in four geographic markets, ordering divestitures for various types of veterinary care in and around Richmond, Virginia, in and around the Washington DC Metro Area, particularly for customers to the southeast in Virginia and Maryland, in and around Denver, Colorado, and in and around downtown San Francisco, California. The Commission finalized the order in October 2022.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
211 0174
Docket Number
C-4770
Case Status
Pending

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

San Juan, IPA, In the Matter of

San Juan IPA, Inc., a physicians’ independent practice association operating in northwestern New Mexico, agreed to settle Commission charges that it orchestrated and carried out agreements among its member doctors to set the price that they would accept from health plans, to bargain collectively to obtain the group’s desired price terms, and to refuse to deal with health plans except on collectively determined price terms. According to the complaint, the effect of this conduct was higher prices for medical services for the area’s consumers. The consent order prohibits the association from collectively negotiating with health plans on behalf of its physicians and from setting their terms of dealing with such purchasers. This consent involves 120 physicians who make up about 80 percent of the doctors practicing independently in the area of Farmington, New Mexico.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
0310181