The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has filed a lawsuit to prevent Tempur Sealy’s $4.3 billion acquisition of Mattress Firm, which it claims could harm competition and lead to higher prices for consumers, according to Reuters.
The lawsuit, filed in a Houston federal court, holds that the deal could lead to job losses for manufacturing workers and that Tempur Sealy (NYSE: TPX) would gain an unfair advantage over competitors in the bedding industry. According to the FTC, the merger could reduce market competition, allowing the company to dominate pricing and product offerings.
Tempur Sealy has responded to the FTC challenge, arguing that the bedding industry remains highly competitive and that Mattress Firm only represents a small portion of the retail market. Tempur Sealy expressed confidence in its ability to resolve the case and proceed with the acquisition by late 2024 or early 2025.
Related: Court Dismisses Monopoly Claims Against Tempur Sealy
Both companies have enlisted top legal experts to defend the deal. Tempur Sealy has retained Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, with a legal team led by Bruce Hoffman, a former FTC competition bureau director, while Mattress Firm is represented by Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, whose team includes antitrust co-leader Sara Razi. On the opposing side, the FTC has brought in Allyson Maltas, a former Latham & Watkins attorney who joined the agency earlier this year.
The FTC’s challenge has drawn attention for being a rare “vertical” merger challenge—a type of merger where the two companies involved do not directly compete in the same market. U.S. antitrust authorities have historically struggled to win such cases in court, making this litigation a closely watched test of the agency’s ability to block non-traditional mergers and one that could set a precedent for future antitrust challenges, particularly in industries with complex supply chains and distribution networks.
Featured News
Judge Appoints Law Firms to Lead Consumer Antitrust Litigation Against Apple
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Epic Health Systems Seeks Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Filed by Particle Health
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Qualcomm Secures Partial Victory in Licensing Dispute with Arm, Jury Splits on Key Issues
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Google Proposes Revised Revenue-Sharing Limits Amid Antitrust Battle
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Japan’s Antitrust Authority Expected to Sanction Google Over Monopoly Practices
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand