The legal library gives you easy access to the FTC’s case information and other official legal, policy, and guidance documents.
20160132: Calpine Corporation; Granite Ridge Holdings LLC
Step N Grip, LLC; Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to Aid Public Comment
Granting of Request for Early Termination of the Waiting Period Under the Premerger Notification Rules
1511001 Informal Interpretation
Nice-Pak Products, Inc., In the Matter of
Woodman’s Food Market, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellee v. The Clorox Co. and The Clorox Sales Co., Defendants-Appellants
20160056: Suncor Energy Inc.; Canadian Oil Sands Limited
20160094: Leeds Equity Partners V, L.P.; Higher One Holdings, Inc.
20160114: Allergan plc; Mimetogen Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Coca-Cola Company, The, In the Matter of
As part of a settlement, The Coca-Cola Company agreed to restrict its access to confidential competitive business information of rival Dr Pepper Snapple Group as a condition for completing Coca-Cola’s proposed $12.3 billion acquisition of its largest North American bottler, which also distributes Dr Pepper Snapple carbonated soft drinks. In a complaint filed with the settlement, the FTC charged that access to cmmercially sensitive information likely would have harmed competition in the U.S. markets for carbonated soft drinks.Under the settlement with the FTC, Coca-Cola will set up a “firewall” to ensure that its ownership of the bottling company does not give certain Coca-Cola employees access to commercially sensitive confidential Dr Pepper Snapple marketing information and brand plans.
Concordia Healthcare / Par Pharmaceutical, In the Matter of
Pharmaceutical companies Concordia Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. settled FTC charges that they entered into an unlawful agreement not to compete in the sale of generic versions of Kapvay, a prescription drug used to treat Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. As part of the settlement, the companies agreed not to enforce the anticompetitive provisions of their agreement. Until May 15, 2015, Concordia and Par were the only two firms permitted by the FDA to market generic Kapvay. Rather than competing against one another, Concordia agreed not to sell an authorized generic version of Kapvay in exchange for a share of Par’s revenues. Under the terms of the settlements, Concordia is prohibited from enforcing the anticompetitive provisions of its agreement with Par, including the profit-sharing provisions, and Par is prohibited from enforcing provisions that bar Concordia from agreeing not to sell an authorized generic version of Kapvay. Concordia began selling generic Kapvay after learning of the FTC’s investigation.