The U.S. District Judge John Tunheim ruled on Tuesday that Agri Stats, a data analytics and consulting firm, must face a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Justice Department and six states. The lawsuit accuses Agri Stats of participating in a price-fixing conspiracy with major chicken, pork and turkey processors.
Indiana-based Agri Stats had sought to dismiss the case, but Judge Tunheim denied this motion, stating that the government’s antitrust claims were sufficient to proceed for now. Agri Stats has consistently denied any wrongdoing.
The lawsuit, initiated last year by the Justice Department, along with California, Texas, North Carolina and other states, alleges that Agri Stats unlawfully collected and shared competitively sensitive information within the meat industry. According to Reuters, major meat processors used these reports to artificially inflate prices.
Judge Tunheim’s 24-page ruling highlighted that Agri Stats’ reports contained “detailed information about where the subscriber stands in comparison to the rest of the industry in terms of sales and live production.” This level of detail, the plaintiffs argue, facilitated coordination among meat processors to maintain high prices.
Read more: Former Novartis Executive Sentenced to Probation for Role in Generic Drug Price-Fixing Scheme
Agri Stats began offering benchmarking reports for the chicken industry in 1985 and later expanded to include turkey and pork data. However, the company ceased producing turkey and pork reports in 2019 and has stated it does not plan to resume these reports. The lawsuit seeks to prevent Agri Stats from continuing to issue its reports.
In a related legal matter, a U.S. judge in Chicago dismissed similar claims against Agri Stats in a private antitrust lawsuit last year. That lawsuit had been brought by restaurants, supermarkets, distributors and consumers. U.S. District Judge Thomas Durkin ruled that the mere provision of a convenient form to transmit information did not constitute Agri Stats joining the alleged conspiracy.
Judge Tunheim made it clear in his order on Tuesday that he would not transfer the government’s case to Chicago and emphasized that he was not bound by Judge Durkin’s previous ruling.
Source: Reuters
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 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