Introduction A recent ruling condemning price discrimination for a popular eye drop brand is yet another reminder that companies cannot afford to ignore antitrust risk under the Robinson-Patman Act (RPA), a longstanding law...more
The rumors of the death of price discrimination enforcement may have been greatly exaggerated. The Robinson-Patman Act (“RPA”) (15 U.S.C. §13), enacted in 1936, prohibits price discrimination by producers and resellers of...more
On May 20, 2024, US District Court Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald rejected a popular over-the-counter eyedrop seller’s bid for a new trial and granted a pricing injunction impacting two large wholesale membership clubs following...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
News of a recently filed Federal Court petition against Total Wine & More (“Total Wine”) has brought renewed focus on aggressive actions by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) to enforce antitrust laws, even at great expense...more
The Ninth Circuit recently revived a portion of a price discrimination claim brought by wholesalers of the popular 5-Hour Energy drink against its manufacturer, which provided more favorable promotional terms to a mass...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
As part of the Biden Administration’s enhanced antitrust enforcement efforts, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is taking a new look at the Robinson-Patman Act (RPA). Several investigations are already underway, with calls...more
On January 10, 2023 Politico reported that the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has launched antitrust investigations into Pepsi and Coca Cola. According to the article, the “companies’ pricing strategies are being...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
After decades of dormancy, enforcement of the Robinson-Patman Act may be making a comeback. In his first public remarks as an FTC Commissioner regarding his views on antitrust enforcement, Commissioner Alvaro Bedoya called...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
On March 1, 2022, a federal judge granted summary judgment in favor of Ford Motor Company (“Ford”), holding that Ford’s Brand Exclusivity Standard, part of Ford’s Lincoln Commitment Program, does not violate the...more
The Non-Profit Institutions Act provides an exemption from the Robinson-Patman Antidiscrimination Act by permitting the sale of discounted drugs to “schools, colleges, universities, public libraries, churches, hospitals, and...more
On November 7, 2017, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released an advisory opinion confirming that a non-profit hospital in New York may sell discounted prescription drugs to the employees of an affiliated medical practice...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
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
A recent complaint charges PepsiCo Inc. with several antitrust violations, including price fixing and predatory pricing in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, conspiracy and attempt to monopolize in violation of...more