It has been a busy year for issues related to drug pricing, and with the election around the corner, litigation issues that have been developing over the last few years are likely to be a key focus for the second half of...more
After decades of dormancy, the Robinson-Patman Act (RPA), a Depression-era antitrust statute prohibiting price discrimination, has recently become the subject of renewed interest from both private plaintiffs and government...more
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has heralded its increased antitrust scrutiny of price discrimination under the Robinson-Patman Act (RPA), though little has come of it to date. Yet, our review of trends in private...more
On March 28, 2024, 14 lawmakers penned an open letter to the Federal Trade Commission urging the agency to revive enforcement of the Robinson-Patman Act. This call to action, coupled with the FTC’s recently renewed interest...more
There have been reports that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is leveraging the long-dormant Robinson-Patman Act as a basis for civil investigations into potential price discrimination by distributors in the alcoholic and...more
While government enforcement of the Robinson-Patman Act (the Act) was all but forgotten for nearly two decades, the Federal Trade Commission (the FTC) announced a second investigation over potential price discrimination in...more
The US Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) reported investigations of Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo. Inc. for price discrimination are a significant step toward the agency’s revival of enforcement under the Robinson-Patman Act...more
While, historically, government enforcement of the Robinson-Patman Act has been virtually non-existent, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently announced its intention to dust-off the oft-forgotten Act to encourage...more
The Selective Extension of Payment Terms May Expose Sellers to Abnormally High Risk under the Robinson-Patman Act - As the economic consequences of social distancing ripple through the economy, businesses throughout the...more
Family-owned wholesalers brought a Robinson-Patman claim against the maker of 5-hour Energy alleging discounts given to Costco amounted to illegal price discrimination. A jury in California rejected the claim after a...more
Last week, a California federal jury concluded that the maker of 5-Hour Energy Drink did not violate federal antitrust law by selling the energy shots to Costco for less than the price charged to its family-owned rivals....more
On October 21, 2019, a jury empaneled by the United States District Court for the Central District of California found that the makers of 5-Hour Energy “shots” did not violate the Robinson-Patman Act (“RPA”) by providing more...more
Failure to show antitrust injury proved fatal to price discrimination claims as the Third Circuit affirmed a directed verdict in favor of cement company, Argos USVI, in a case brought by its customer, ready-mix concrete...more
Rebates and other volume discounts are a frequent practice in businesses today. While few manufacturers recognize that pure volume discounts and other forms of rebates — unless designed and implemented properly — can run...more
In the latest development in Woodman’s Food Market v. Clorox—the saga between Clorox and Woodman’s that last year generated a landmark Robinson-Patman Act (RP Act) decision by the Seventh Circuit—Clorox is asking the district...more
In a precedent-setting opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Aerotec International, Inc. v. Honeywell International, Inc., No. 14-15562, 2016 WL 4709868 (9th Cir. Sept. 9, 2016), affirmed the summary...more
On August 12, 2016, the Seventh Circuit decided Woodman’s Food Market, Inc. v. Clorox Co., No. 15-3001, and held that Clorox’s refusal to sell bulk-sized packages of certain products to some retailers, like Woodman’s, when it...more
On August 12, the Seventh Circuit issued its decision in Woodman’s Food Market v. Clorox Co., an appeal that we have been watching closely. The Seventh Circuit’s ruling, which held that product package size is not a...more
Woodman’s Food Market, Inc. v. Clorox Co., No. 15-3001 (7th Cir. August 12, 2016). Clorox Sales Company and Clorox Company produce a range of consumer goods. Clorox sold goods to Plaintiff Woodman’s Food Market, a...more
On August 12, 2016, the Seventh Circuit reversed the district court decision allowing Woodman’s Food Market, Inc.’s (Woodman’s) price discrimination lawsuit against The Clorox Company and The Clorox Sales Company (Clorox) to...more
On August 12, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued an opinion in Woodman's Farm Market, Inc. v. The Clorox Co., No. 15-3001 (7th Cir. August 12, 2016), in which it held that a plaintiff cannot state...more
The Robinson-Patman Act (the “RPA” or the “Act”) is designed to ensure fair competition among purchasers. The Act separately addresses different forms of unlawful discrimination between competing purchasers — section 2(a)...more
Cash & Henderson Drugs, Inc. v. Johnson & Johnson, recently decided by the Second Circuit, concerns Robinson-Patman Act claims that retail pharmacies brought against pharmaceutical manufacturers. The retail pharmacies alleged...more
On September 8, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit granted a motion filed by household products manufacturer Clorox for interlocutory appeal of two decisions by the U.S. District Court for the Western District...more
Manufacturers of goods and their attorneys are keeping close watch on the case developing between Woodman's Markets and Clorox. At issue is a manufacturer's ability to use large-packaged goods to work around the price...more