Tag: Merger

Pharmaceutical companies Actavis plc and Forest Laboratories, Inc. agreed to sell or relinquish their rights to four generic pharmaceuticals that treat hypertension, angina, cirrhosis, and prevent seizures to settle FTC charges that Actavis’s acquisition of Forest likely would be anticompetitive. According to the FTC’s complaint, Actavis’s acquisition of Forest, as originally proposed, would violate federal antitrust laws by reducing competition in the markets for three current generic products. In addition, the FTC’s complaint also alleges that the proposed transaction would delay the introduction of another generic drug. Under the proposed FTC settlement order, the companies have agreed to relinquish their rights to market generic diltiazem hydrochloride (AB4) to Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.; sell generic ursodiol and generic lamotrigine ODT to Impax Laboratories, Inc.; and sell generic propranolol hydrochloride to Catalent Pharma Solutions, Inc. Under the terms of the proposed settlement, Actavis and Forest must ensure the viability, marketability, and competitiveness of the drugs that are
being divested until they are sold.

Hertz Global Holdings, Inc. agreed to sell its Advantage Rent A Car business, as well as the rights to operate 29 Dollar Thrifty on-airport locations around the country, to settle charges that Hertz’s $2.3 billion acquisition of Dollar Thrifty would have been harmed competition in 72 airport markets throughout the United States.

Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. and Precision Dermatology, Inc. agreed to sell or relinquish rights to Precision’s branded single-agent topical tretinoins and generic Retin-A, common acne treatments, to settle FTC charges that Valeant’s proposed $475 million acquisition of Precision would likely be anticompetitive. According to the FTC complaint, Valeant’s proposed acquisition of Precision would likely reduce competition in the market for branded and generic single-agent topical tretinoins, and in a separate market for generic Retin-A. The proposed consent order requires Valeant to sell Precision’s assets related to Tretin-X, its branded single-agent topical tretinoin, to Actavis, Inc., and Precision’s assets related to generic Retin-A to Matawan Pharmaceuticals LLC, a subsidiary of Rouses Point Pharmaceuticals.

Fidelity National Financial, Inc. agreed to settle charges that its proposed $2.9 billion acquisition of Lender Processing Services, Inc. (LPS) would likely substantially lessen competition by combining the firms’ title plant assets in several local markets in Oregon. To preserve competition, the proposed settlement requires Fidelity to sell a copy of LPS’s title plants in six Oregon counties and an ownership interest equivalent to LPS’s share of a jointly owned title plant in the Portland, Oregon, metropolitan area.

Akorn Enterprises, Inc. and Hi-Tech Pharmacal, Inc. agreed to sell the rights and assets to three generic prescription eye medications and two generic topical anesthetics to Watson Laboratories, Inc., to settle FTC charges that Akorn’s proposed $640 million acquisition of Hi-Tech would be anticompetitive and lead to higher prices for consumers. The proposed order requires the parties to sell either Akorn’s or Hi-Tech’s rights and assets to each of the five drug products to Watson, and requires Akorn to assign Watson its contract for making branded and generic EMLA cream within 10 days after the deal is consummated. In addition, the companies must maintain the drugs to be sold as viable, marketable, and competitive pending their divestiture, and must allow the FTC to appoint a monitor to ensure that the companies comply with the order’s requirements.

The FTC challenged Ardagh Group, S.A.’s proposed $1.7 billion acquisition of Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc., alleging that it will reduce competition and result in the two firms – the merged firm and its only remaining significant competitor, Owens-Illinois – controlling in excess of 75 percent of the U.S. markets for glass containers for beer and spirits customers, resulting in higher prices for those customers. The FTC issued an administrative complaint against the two companies, alleging that the acquisition would violate U.S. antitrust law. The proposed acquisition would combine the second-largest manufacturer of glass containers (Saint-Gobain) and the third-largest (Ardagh).The complaint alleges that glass container competitors possess a wealth of information about each other and the glass container industry, and that reducing the number of major competitors from three to two will make it substantially easier for the remaining two competitors to coordinate with one another to achieve supracompetitive prices or other anticompetitive outcomes. The Commission also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in federal court to preserve the status quo pending the outcome of the administrative trial on the merits.  On 11/3/13, the parties stipulated to a hold separate order in the federal court proceeding.   On 11/8/13 the Commission stayed the part 3 litigation pending settlement discussions. On 4/10/14, Ardagh Group SA agreed to sell six of its nine glass container manufacturing plants in the United States to settle the FTC's charges. The FTC’s settlement order requires Ardagh to sell six of the manufacturing plants and related assets it acquired through its 2012 acquisition of Anchor Glass Container Corporation, along with Anchor’s former corporate headquarters in Tampa, Fla.

The Commission approved an administrative complaint, alleging that a combined Jostens/American Achievement Corp. ("AAC") would control an unduly high percentage of the high school and college rings markets, making it a dominant firm with only one smaller meaningful competitor in both markets.  The Commission charged that the proposed combination of Jostens and AAC would likely have been anticompetitive and led to higher prices and reduced service for both high school and college students who buy class rings.  The FTC also voted to seek a preliminary injunction in federal court to stop Jostens from proceeding with the proposed acquisition of its close rival, AAC.  On April 17, 2014, the parties abandoned their plans to merge.

On 4/20/2011, the FTC challenged Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc.’s (Phoebe’s) proposed acquisition of rival Palmyra Park Hospital, Inc. (Palmyra) from HCA, in Albany, Georgia. The FTC’s administrative complaint alleges that the deal will reduce competition significantly and allow the combined Phoebe/Palmyra to raise prices for general acute-care hospital services charged to commercial health plans, substantially harming patients and local employers and employees. The FTC also alleges that Phoebe has structured the deal in a way that uses the Hospital Authority of Albany-Dougherty County (the Authority) in an attempt to shield the anticompetitive acquisition from federal antitrust scrutiny under the “state action” doctrine. The FTC’s staff, together with the Attorney General of the State of Georgia, filed a separate complaint in federal district court in Albany, Georgia, seeking an order to halt any transaction involving Phoebe, the Authority, or Palmyra, under which Phoebe would acquire control of Palmyra’s operations, until the conclusion of the FTC’s administrative proceeding and any subsequent appeals. On 2/19/2013, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remanded further proceedings.  On June 27, 2011, the district court denied the motion for a preliminary injunction on the grounds that the transaction was protected by the state action doctrine.  On December 14, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed.  In February 2013, the Supreme Court reversed, finding that the state of Georgia had not clearly articulated a policy that would permit the Hospital Authority to approve anticompetitive mergers.

On 3/14/2013, the Commission issued an order granting complaint counsels motion to lift the stay on administrative proceedings. On 4/9/2013, an amended complaint and renewed motions for a PI and TRO were filed in federal district court in Georgia, pending an 8/5/2013 administrative trial. On 5/15/2013, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia granted the FTC’s motion for a temporary restraining order. On 6/25/2013, the Commission granted the motion to withdraw the matter from Part III, and accepted for public comment a proposed settlement of its charges. Due to the unique circumstances of the Certificate of Need (CON) laws in Georgia, the Commission originally believed it was unable to require that the hospitals become independent competitors. On 9/5/2014, based on public comments received, as well as other information, the Commission determined that Georgia’s CON laws may not preclude structural relief, and voted to withdraw its acceptance of the proposed consent agreement and return the matter to administrative litigation. On 3/31/15, the FTC entered into a settlement agreement requiring Phoebe Putney and the Hospital Authority must notify the FTC in advance of acquiring any part of a hospital or a controlling interest in other healthcare providers in the Albany, Georgia area for the next 10 years, and prohibiting them from objecting to regulatory applications made by potential new hospital providers in the same area for up to five years. The settlement is similar to the one proposed in 2013 and does not require structural relief.

Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. agreed to sell assets to GE Healthcare to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that its proposed $13.6 billion acquisition of Life Technologies Corporation (Life) would likely substantially lessen competition.The FTC complaint alleged that the deal, as it was originally proposed, would have eliminated close competition between Thermo Fisher and Life and substantially increased concentration in the markets for short/small interfering ribonucleic acid (siRNA) reagents, cell culture media, and cell culture sera, enabling the combined firm to raise prices and reduce quality for consumers. The proposed order settling the FTC’s charges requires Thermo Fisher to divest its gene modulation business Dharmacon, which contains the siRNA reagents business, as well as its cell culture media and sera business including the HyClone brand to GE Healthcare, along with all intellectual property and know-how necessary to operate each of the divested businesses.

Media research company Nielsen Holdings N.V. settled charges that its acquisition of Arbitron Inc. may substantially lessen competition for national syndicated cross-platform audience measurement services.  Nielsen and Arbitron are the best-positioned firms to develop (or partner with others to develop) a national syndicated cross-platform audience measurement service because of their existing audience measurement panels and proven audience measurement technology assets. To settle the charges, the Commission required the divestiture of assets related to Arbitron’s cross-platform audience measurement business, including data from its representative panel, to a Commission-approved buyer.