Skip to main content

Displaying 401 - 420 of 1581

FXI Holdings and Innocor, In the Matter of

Polyurethane foam producers FXI Holdings, Inc. and Innocor, Inc. have agreed to divest polyurethane foam pouring plants in three regional markets to Future Foam, Inc., to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that FXI’s proposed $850 million acquisition of Innocor would violate federal antitrust law. The FTC alleges that the combination of FXI and Innocor would substantially lessen competition for low-density conventional polyurethane foam used in home furnishings in three regional markets: the Pacific Northwest (Oregon and Washington); the Midwest states of Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio; and Mississippi. To remedy the proposed transaction’s anticompetitive effects, the proposed order requires the companies to divest FXI’s foam-pouring plant in Kent, Washington and Innocor’s foam-pouring plants in Elkhart, Indiana and Tupelo, Mississippi to Future Foam no later than 10 days after the close of the acquisition. On April 20, 2020, the Commission voted 5-0 to approve the final order settling the charges.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
191 0087
Case Status
Pending

Thomas Jefferson University, et al.

The Federal Trade Commission has issued an administrative complaint and authorized a federal court action to block the proposed merger of Jefferson Health and Albert Einstein Healthcare Network, two leading providers of inpatient general acute care hospital services and inpatient acute rehabilitation services in both Philadelphia County and Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. The proposed merger would eliminate the robust competition between Jefferson and Einstein for inclusion in health insurance companies’ hospital networks to the detriment of patients. The Commission vote to issue the administrative complaint and to authorize staff to seek a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction was 4-0-1, with Chairman Joseph J. Simons recused. The administrative trial is scheduled to begin on Sept. 1, 2020.

Type of Action
Federal
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
181 0128
Case Status
Pending

Par Petroleum/Mid Pac Petroleum, In the Matter of

Texas-based energy company Par Petroleum Corporation agreed to terminate its storage and throughput rights at a key gasoline terminal in Hawaii, to settle FTC charges that Par’s proposed $107 million acquisition of Koko’oha Investments, Inc.’s wholly-owned subsidiary Mid Pac Petroleum, LLC would likely be anticompetitive. According to the FTC’s complaint, the proposed merger would reduce competition and lead to higher prices for bulk supply of Hawaii-grade gasoline blendstock, ultimately increasing the price of gasoline for Hawaii consumers. As a result of the proposed acquisition, Par gained Mid Pac’s rights to Aloha’s Barbers Point terminal, which it does not need for importation because it produces its own blendstock, but which it could exercise in a manner that impairs Aloha’s use of its terminal. If Par were to hamper Aloha’s import capability, it would weaken Aloha’s ability to negotiate lower bulk supply prices from Par and Chevron, and thus reduce Aloha’s ability to compete effectively in the bulk supply market. Potential new competitors would be unable to deter or counteract the anticompetitive effects resulting from the acquisition, according to the complaint. The consent agreement requires Par to terminate the Barbers Point terminal storage and throughput rights it acquires from Mid Pac within five days after the merger is completed. Par will retain rights to load a limited number of tanker trucks at the Barbers Point terminal, and must obtain prior FTC approval to modify these rights or enter into any new agreement at the Barbers Point terminal. In January 2020, the FTC sought public comment on Par’s application to modify the agreement to store petroleum products at Barbers Point terminal.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
141 0171
Docket Number
C-4522