The legal library gives you easy access to the FTC’s case information and other official legal, policy, and guidance documents.
19991518: Capital Z Financial Services Fund II, L.P.; PennCorp Financial Group, Inc.
19991516: Capital Z Financial Services Fund II, L.P.; Universal American Financial Corp.
19991260: Photobition Group plc; Wace Group plc
19991212: Xerox Corporation; Visioneer, Inc.
19991211: Visioneer, Inc.; Xerox Corporation
9902009 Informal Interpretation
PT-1 Communications, Inc., et al.
19991669: Charterhouse Equity Partners III, L.P.; Mathew D. Wolf
19991594: Santa Fe Energy Resources, Inc.; Snyder Oil Corporation
19991575: Minnesota Masonic Home; Charles T. Thompson
19991555: M. Michel Besnier; J. R . Simplot Company
19991545: Jefferson Health System, Inc.; Delaware Valley Medical Center
19991465: Iridium LLC; AT&T Corp.
19991414: BellSouth Corporation; AT&T Corp.
19991413: AT&T Corp.; BellSouth Corporation
Lafarge, S.A., and Lafarge Corporation, In the Matter of
To settle FTC charges, LaFarge, Corp. agreed to restructure its agreement to purchase certain assets of Holnam, Inc. LaFarge and Holnam are two of five competitors in the portland cement market in the Puget Sound area. In February 1998, LaFarge and Holnam signed a letter of intent detailing an agreement under which LaFarge would buy Holnam's Seattle cement plant, cement distribution terminal in Vancouver, Washington, a rock quarry in Twin Rivers, Washington, and related assets. The FTC alleged that a provision of the sales agreement between LaFarge and Holnam would have imposed a penalty on LaFarge if it produced quantities of cement in excess of 85 percent of the Holnam plant's capacity. According to the FTC, this provision would encourage LaFarge to restrict the output of cement at the Seattle plant to avoid the production penalty and would prevent an increase in supply and a reduction in price for cement in the Puget Sound area. To restore competition, LaFarge and Holnam agreed to drop the production penalty clause.
Merck & Co., Inc., and Merck-Medco Managed Care, L.L.C
The complaint, issued with the consent order, alleged that as a result of Merck's 1993 acquisition of Medco, the nation's largest benefits manager, Merck's drugs received favorable treatment through Medco's drug-list formulary made available to medical professionals who prescribe and dispense prescriptions to health plan beneficiaries. The consent order requires Medco, among other things, to maintain an "open formulary" to include drugs approved by an independent Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee, staffed by physicians and pharmacologists who have no financial interest in Merck.