Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

The Physician Network Consulting, L.L.C. of Baton Rouge Louisiana; Michael J. Taylor; Professional Orthopedic Services, Inc; The Bone and Joint Clinic of Baton Rouge, Inc.; Baton Rouge Orthopaedic Clinic, L.L.C.; and Orthopaedic Surgery Associates of Baton Rouge, L.L.C. settled charges that they entered into agreements to fix prices and other terms on which they would deal with United HealthCare of Louisiana, Inc., a health insurance company. Physician Network Consulting is an agent for Professional Orthopedic Services’ members.

A network of doctors, hospitals, and its executive director, William R. Diggins, settled charges that they illegally engaged in price-fixing activities that raised health care costs in five Maine counties by negotiating jointly with third-party payers in a effort to obtain higher compensation and more advantageous contract terms for its members.

Consent order requires divestiture of Baxter's Autoplex product line of Factor VIII inhibitors used in the treatment for hemophilia and the licensing of Immuno International AG's fibrin sealant, a biologic product in development to be used to control bleeding in surgical procedures. According to the complaint issued with the final order, the acquisition of Immuno International would tend to create a monopoly and increase Baxter's ability to unilaterally raise prices in the market for the research, manufacture and sale of biologic products derived from human blood plasma.

The Commission issued an administrative complaint against Warner Communications, Inc., and several subsidiaries of Vivendi Universal S.A., charging them with illegally agreeing to fix prices for audio and video products featuring The Three Tenors.  A settlement with Warner barred future agreements to fix prices or restrict advertising.  After an administrative trial against Vivendi, an ALJ found that the agreement, while made in association with an otherwise legal joint venture between the companies, violated Section 5 of the FTC Act by illegally reducing competition in the U.S. market for the audio and video products cited.  The Commission upheld the ruling of an administrative law judge and prohibited PolyGram from entering into any agreement with competitors to fix the prices or restrict the advertising of products they have produced independently. In July 2005, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed the Commission’s decision in Polygram Holding Inc., validating the Commission’s approach to analyzing horizontal conduct among competitors.