United States: Department of Justice

This is an Insight article, written by a selected partner as part of GCR's co-published content. Read more on Insight

In summary

2020 saw antitrust agencies across the Americas prioritising efforts to fight the covid-19 global pandemic, which the agencies were prepared for given their focus during the past year on protecting competition in essential industries, including food and healthcare. Despite the pandemic, important policy advances were made in the areas of cartel enforcement, merger enforcement and procedural fairness. Agencies began using technology in new ways to advance their priorities and stay connected across the Americas.

Discussion points

  • Covid-19 response efforts
  • Cartel enforcement
  • Price-gouging and hoarding
  • No-poach and non-compete agreements
  • International cooperation

Referenced in this article

  • Brazil Administrative Council for Economic Defence
  • Framework on Competition Agency Procedures
  • UK Competition and Markets Authority
  • Mexico Federal Economic Competition Commission
  • United States Department of Justice
  • Chile National Economic Prosecutor
  • United States Federal Trade Commission
  • International Competition Network
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
  • The United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement

Antitrust in the Americas

Covid-19 response efforts across the Americas

In spring 2020, governments and markets faced disruption on an unprecedented scale due to the global covid-19 pandemic. Despite the challenges of working remotely, the Antitrust Division of the US Department of Justice (DOJ) quickly adapted and, through the use of technology, continues to advance existing enforcement and policy goals while prioritising its response to the pandemic.

In the United States, the DOJ and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) moved swiftly to facilitate the national response to covid-19. In March 2020, the US antitrust agencies issued a joint statement offering parties an expedited procedure to receive guidance on collaborative activity related to covid-19. 1 The agencies committed to issuing guidance within seven business days of receiving the request and information from the parties, substantially accelerating a process that typically takes months. Since the agencies announced this expedited review process, the DOJ has issued four covid-19 business review letters (as at July 2020): two letters providing guidance to medical equipment suppliers on their collaborative efforts working with government agencies to expedite and increase the distribution of important medical equipment, 2 one letter to meat producers on collaborative efforts to solve supply issues created by covid-19, as the pandemic affected their ability to operate their facilities, 3 and one related to the production of covid-19 treatments. 4 In each instance, the DOJ provided guidance that permitted efficiency-enhancing joint efforts while minimising any negative effects on competition outside of the covid-19 response efforts.

In a second joint statement in April 2020, the DOJ and FTC reaffirmed the importance of competition in labour markets, cautioning employers that any attempt to use the covid-19 crisis as a basis to collude and deprive workers of the benefits of competitive pay or terms of employment would be subject to an enforcement action. 5

Many other competition agencies around the world have engaged in similar work in response to covid-19. In Latin America, several competition agencies announced a special focus on covid-19-related collaborative efforts. In Brazil, the Administrative Council for Economic Defence (CADE) committed to give special attention to joint ventures or other collaborations among firms necessary to the health emergency. 6 In Chile, the National Economic Prosecutor (FNE) announced that mergers aimed at strengthening the supply of essential goods during the crisis could be closed before receiving official agency approval. 7 In Mexico, the Federal Economic Competition Commission (COFECE) announced that pro-competitive and non-exclusionary collaborations aimed at ensuring and strengthening the supply of essential goods would not be subject to enforcement action. 8

In response to the pandemic, the DOJ has taken steps to combat price-gouging and hoarding. 9 Several Latin American competition agencies have likewise responded to the covid-19 crisis by warning sellers of essential products against excessive pricing, hoarding or restricting access to important supplies. For example, enforcers in Colombia and Ecuador issued public statements urging suppliers not to engage in these behaviours, 10 and Colombia’s Superintendence of Industry and Commerce (SIC) launched an app that allows consumers to use their smartphone to report complaints related to covid-19. 11 The extent to which high prices alone can constitute a violation of law varies widely by jurisdiction, and the appropriate means of addressing high pricing remains an area of controversy among competition law regulators. In Brazil, for example, a price-gouging bill in Congress drew objections from CADE economists based on competition concerns. 12 Nonetheless, several competition agencies across Latin America launched investigations into covid-19-related price-gouging. CADE opened investigations into pricing in the pharmaceutical and medical industries, including by suppliers of surgical masks and hand sanitisers. 13 The SIC opened investigations into a drugstore chain and a construction equipment supplier for price-gouging of sanitising gels and face masks, filters and goggles. 14 The FNE also reported opening investigations into pricing of essential products. 15

Bilaterally and multilaterally, competition agencies throughout the Americas have worked closely together to share the various changes covid-19 has wrought in their jurisdiction. For example, as soon as the pandemic was declared, the DOJ spearheaded an effort to facilitate cooperation among international enforcers by collecting and sharing on a regular basis rapidly developing information on how covid-19 has impacted competition law enforcement efforts around the world. After the DOJ successfully developed a regular process for collecting and disseminating this information, the International Competition Network (ICN) integrated this project into its ongoing work streams. Since spring 2020, the DOJ has also participated in several virtual events hosted by the ICN, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development on international cooperation, investigations and competition law policy in the wake of covid-19.

Cartel enforcement across the Americas

Over the past year, the DOJ brought significant enforcement actions in two industries that greatly affect consumers’ lives: healthcare and food. The DOJ’s ongoing investigation of generic pharmaceuticals targets price-fixing, bid rigging and customer allocation schemes in one of the most important industries for the health and wallets of US consumers. To date, the investigation has resulted in charges against six pharmaceutical companies and four executives for conspiring to fix prices for essential drugs relied upon to treat a range of diseases and chronic conditions. 16 Of the four executives, three have pleaded guilty and one is awaiting trial. Five of the companies resolved the felony charges by deferred prosecution agreements, under which they admitted wrongdoing and agreed to pay more than US$425 million in criminal penalties. A sixth company was charged and awaits trial. The DOJ also recently charged a leading cancer treatment centre for a long-running conspiracy to allocate cancer treatments in south-west Florida. To resolve the charge, the treatment centre agreed to pay a US$100 million statutory maximum criminal penalty and waive non-compete provisions so that its current and former oncologists and other employees can open or join a competing oncology practice. 17 Both investigations illustrate the DOJ’s ongoing commitment to safeguarding the US’s critical healthcare markets from collusion, particularly when it affects vulnerable and elderly US consumers.

Curbing cartels in the medical industry has been a priority across other countries in the Americas as well. In the past year, CADE in Brazil sentenced an executive for his role in a blood-products supply cartel 18 and reached settlements in two probes into medical devices, both involving multiple companies and individuals. 19

Prosecuting cartels in the food industry has also been a recent priority across the Americas. Due to the DOJ’s enforcement efforts, a major supplier in the canned tuna industry was ordered to pay a US$100 million criminal fine – the statutory maximum – and a former CEO was convicted for participating in a three-year conspiracy to fix prices for canned tuna. 20 In June 2020, that CEO was sentenced to serve 40 months in prison and pay a US$100,000 fine. 21 In total, four executives and two companies have been charged in the investigation, and the companies have agreed to pay a combined US$125 million in criminal fines. Also in June 2020, four current or former senior executives at two chicken producers were indicted for conspiring to fix prices of broiler chickens; these represent the first charges in an ongoing investigation into this industry. Similarly, Latin American regulators pursued cartels in the food industry, announcing investigations of collusion involving tortillas 22 and salmon feed. 23

In addition, the DOJ continued its pursuit of anticompetitive practices in labour markets by intervening in a private action relating to an alleged no-poach agreement between two university hospitals. Although the civil case settled in autumn 2019, the DOJ successfully intervened for the purpose of enforcing the injunctive-relief provisions in the settlement, which barred unlawful no-poach agreements for five years. 24 Other jurisdictions are also enforcing the antitrust laws to prevent agreements among employers that interfere with competition in labour markets. For example, in Mexico, COFECE continued its ongoing investigation into no-poach agreements relating to professional football players. 25

Protecting taxpayer-funded projects from cartel activity has also been a recent DOJ focus. In pursuit of this goal, the DOJ launched the Procurement Collusion Strike Force (PCSF) in November 2019. The PCSF, an initiative of the Antitrust Division, is an inter-agency national effort to better deter, detect, investigate and prosecute antitrust crimes and related schemes affecting taxpayer dollars. 26 The PCSF leads outreach and training for procurement officials, criminal investigators, government contractors and data scientists in an effort to prevent criminal antitrust violations and other crimes that affect procurement, grant and programme funding at all levels of government – federal, state and local; it brings extensive resources to bear on the problem of collusion in sales to the government, which is the subject of approximately one-third of the Antitrust Division’s close to 100 open investigations. 27 Since its launch, more than 50 federal, state and local government agencies have contacted the PCSF seeking outreach training, assistance with safeguarding their procurement processes, and opportunities to partner with the PCSF on investigations. In just the last few months, members of the PCSF have trained more than 2,000 criminal investigators, data scientists and procurement officials. The DOJ introduced the PCSF model to the global law enforcement community at the virtual meeting of the OECD in spring 2020 and looks forward to continuing to share the model and best practices with enforcers worldwide. 28

The year saw significant policy developments in cartel enforcement in the Americas as well. Following the DOJ’s announcement in July 2019 that it would begin to credit corporate compliance programmes where appropriate at both the charging and sentencing phases, Peru’s National Institute for the Defence of Competition and Protection of Intellectual Property (Indecopi) instituted its own policy to give credit in certain instances for corporate compliance programmes. In another major development, in autumn 2019, COFECE finalised the rules by which it would recognise, for the first time, attorney–client privilege for documents seized during dawn raids. COFECE also revised its leniency policy, underscoring its authority to revoke leniency under certain conditions, partly in response to concerns about leniency applicants not cooperating in good faith with ongoing investigations.

Due to wide variation in requirements for obtaining leniency across jurisdictions, which may affect leniency application rates worldwide, the DOJ spearheaded the ICN’s development of guidance on enhancing cross-border leniency cooperation. The guidance, which provides a road map for jurisdictions to work effectively to prosecute cartels without interference with each other’s investigations, was approved by the ICN in July 2019 – the culmination of a two-year dialogue among ICN members on how to strengthen leniency through increased international cooperation. 29 Because leniency remains one of the best ways to detect cartels, increased international cooperation could result in new international cartel investigations.

As cartels increasingly cross national boundaries, strong international cooperation can help bring cartelists to justice. For example, in January 2020, a Dutch national who had been indicted 10 years ago for participating in a global cartel relating to air cargo was extradited from Italy and agreed to plead guilty to price-fixing. 30 Her extradition is the second based solely on an antitrust charge.

Merger enforcement across the Americas

This year has seen significant developments in merger enforcement across the Americas. Enforcers continued to scrutinise deals with anticompetitive effects and to take steps to block them where appropriate. Several significant mergers were either blocked outright by regulators or abandoned by the parties after facing steep opposition from merger authorities.

Competition agencies across the Americas are taking a hard look at mergers involving digital platforms. For example, in summer 2019, Mexico’s COFECE did not allow WalMart, a significant grocery retailer, to acquire Cornershop, an online grocery delivery platform, marking the first time COFECE has blocked a vertical merger involving a digital platform. 31 In August 2019, the DOJ sued to prevent Sabre from acquiring the Farelogix online travel-booking platform. Although the court ruled in the parties’ favour after an eight-day trial, the parties abandoned the transaction after the DOJ announced it intended to appeal the decision and after the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority found the deal unlawful under UK competition law. 32

When mergers must be cleared in multiple jurisdictions, cooperation among competition authorities can make enforcement more effective. This year, the DOJ engaged in extensive cooperation and consultation with several Latin American authorities, including the FNE, CADE and COFECE, on numerous cross-border and regional transactions. For example, the DOJ and COFECE conducted extensive investigations into the proposed merger of McGraw Hill and Cengage, two leading textbook providers in the US and Mexico. The parties abandoned the transaction in May 2020, citing the significant divestitures that would have been required for DOJ approval. 33 We expect the high level of cooperation and consultation on transactions to continue in the coming year.

In February 2020, for the first time, the DOJ used an alternate dispute resolution process instead of a full trial to resolve a matter. In the proposed acquisition of Aleris by Novelis, two producers of aluminium products, the parties agreed to participate in a binding arbitration process to resolve the dispositive issue of market definition. After a multi-week process that included the presentation of documents and both fact and expert witnesses, the arbitrator agreed with the DOJ’s conception of market definition in March 2020. In mid-May, the deal was allowed to be consummated conditioned upon significant divestitures. 34

Competition agencies in the Americas have also recently advanced merger policy. In March 2019, Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim of the Antitrust Division announced that a draft of vertical merger guidelines was under way. The DOJ and FTC released joint draft vertical merger guidelines in February 2020 and conducted workshops to collect feedback and perspectives from diverse groups, 35 culminating in the issuance of new guidelines in June 2020. 36 The OECD opened a new regional competition centre for Latin America in Lima, Peru, and a new merger law took effect in Peru in early 2020. The DOJ and FTC supported this development by providing Indecopi with extensive training and technical assistance workshops on merger analysis in spring 2020.

International cooperation across the Americas

In recent years, the DOJ has advanced an agenda for international cooperation by focusing on promoting fundamental due process and ensuring competition agencies have fair and effective procedures in place.

As part of its efforts, the DOJ spearheaded a framework for international cooperation by antitrust regulators, marking the first multilateral agreement among competition enforcement agencies focused on promoting fundamental due process. This framework for international cooperation, known as the Competition Agency Procedures (CAP), was completed in May 2019 and was subsequently signed by more than 70 competition law agencies around the world, including all major regulators in the Americas. 37 Agencies that participate in the CAP endorse and commit to adhering to key principles enumerated in the CAP, including:

  • transparency in laws and guidelines;
  • timely notice to parties of investigations and enforcement actions;
  • a meaningful opportunity for parties to examine evidence and witnesses against them and to present a defence before a judgment against them;
  • reasonableness in duration of investigations and enforcement proceedings;
  • confidential treatment of parties’ information in enforcement proceedings;
  • lack of conflicts of interest of decision makers in the matters for which they are responsible;
  • availability of representation by counsel and attorney–client privilege;
  • decisions that are issued in writing; and
  • a right to independent review of final decisions.

Using a uniform template, participants explain their agency’s protections in the key areas laid out in the CAP; the completed templates are posted for the public on the ICN website. 38 Competition agencies can use the templates as a starting point for dialogue and to understand another jurisdiction’s procedural protections when requesting case cooperation. As the CAP reaches its one-year anniversary, the co-chairs are planning substantive programming in the coming year on how best to leverage the templates and identify best practices.

Beyond the CAP, the United States has advanced principles of procedural fairness in other ways. For example, the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA), the free trade agreement that came into effect on 1 July 2020, includes an extensive chapter on competition policy. 39 That chapter includes provisions on procedural fairness in competition law enforcement, and signatories to the trade agreement have committed to ensuring certain procedures are in place, including many enumerated in the CAP. The chapter also acknowledges the importance of cooperation among the competition agencies of the three jurisdictions, as well as the importance of the OECD and the ICN as entities that support international cooperation in competition law policy and enforcement.

The accession of various Latin American countries to the OECD in 2019 and 2020 will also permit greater cooperation among agencies. For example, Colombia was admitted to the OECD in April 2020 and Costa Rica is expected to become a member within the next year. As these countries join the OECD, the enforcement efforts of their competition authorities will be enhanced, consistent with international norms.

Finally, as with most competition agencies worldwide, technology has helped drive key initiatives – including outreach and collaboration efforts across the Americas – as most of the DOJ’s staff worked remotely during the pandemic. Using videoconferencing platforms, the DOJ has continued to provide technical assistance globally and in Latin America, sharing best practices and building relationships with other enforcers. In the 12-month period ending in June 2020, the DOJ provided training on cartel investigation and enforcement to agencies in Mexico, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Peru and Barbados. Some of the events had a regional focus and included enforcers from multiple jurisdictions. Technology has also assisted in many other areas of enforcement, as the DOJ began to conduct meetings and depositions by video and teleconference, and accept electronic filings, and prepared to appear remotely in courtrooms. 40


Despite the covid-19 pandemic, competition law enforcement throughout the Americas remains robust, with significant enforcement matters and international case cooperation in both cartels and mergers. Competition agencies in the Americas also made important strides in competition policy this year, and procedural fairness continues to be part of the mainstream dialogue for competition enforcers participating in the CAP or the USMCA. The use of technology to overcome the challenges of covid-19-related telework has opened the door to delivery of technical assistance and other forms of training in new ways that are likely to be here to stay.



1 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice and Fed. Trade Comm’n, The Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission Announce Expedited Antitrust Procedure and Guidance for Coronavirus Public Health Efforts (24 Mar 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-and-federal-trade-commission-announce-expedited-antitrust-procedure-and.

2 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Justice Department Issues Business Review Letter to AmerisourceBergen Supporting Distribution of Critical Medicines Under Expedited Procedures for COVID-19 Pandemic Response (20 Apr 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-issues-business-review-letter-amerisourcebergen-supporting-distribution. See also, Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Department of Justice Issues Business Review Letter to Medical Supplies Distributors Supporting Project Airbridge Under Expedited Procedure for COVID-19 Pandemic Response (4 Apr 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-issues-business-review-letter-medical-supplies-distributors-supporting.

3 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Department of Justice Supports National Pork Producers Council’s Ability to Combat Meat Shortage (15 May 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-supports-national-pork-producers-council-s-ability-combat-meat-shortage.

4 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Department of Justice Issues Business Review to Monoclonal Antibody Manufacturers to Expedite and Increase the Production of Covid-19 Mab Treatments (23 July 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-issues-business-review-letter-monoclonal-antibody-manufacturers-expedite.

5 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice and Fed. Trade Comm’n, Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission Jointly Issue Statement on COVID-19 and Competition in U.S. Labor Markets (13 Apr 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-and-federal-trade-commission-jointly-issue-statement-covid-19-and.

6 ‘Antitrust – CADE and Antitrust Law in Times of Crisis’, TozziniFreire (2 Apr 2020), https://tozzinifreire.com.br/en/boletins/covid-19antitrust-cade-and-antitrust-law-in-times-of-crisis.

7 ‘Deals to Strengthen Supply in Mid of Covid-19 Can be Closed Before Chilean Antitrust Approval’, MLex.com (8 Apr 2020), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=1177915&siteid=203&rdir=1.

8 Press Release, Federal Economic Competition Commission (COFECE), COFECE’s position for enforcing the Federal Economic Competition Law in light of the current health emergency (27 Mar 2020), available at www.cofece.mx/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/COFECE-012-2020_COFECE-covid-19.pdf.

9 See Memorandum from William Barr, Attorney General of the US Department of Justice, to all United States attorneys (24 Mar 2020), available at www.justice.gov/file/1262776/download; Memorandum from William Barr, Attorney General of the US Department of Justice, to all United States attorneys (16 Mar 2020), available at www.justice.gov/ag/page/file/1258676/download.

10 ‘Colombia’s SIC Orders Retail Shops to Stop Price-Gouging’ (translated), PaRR.com (24 Apr 2020), available at https://app.parr-global.com/intelligence/view/prime-3025055; ‘Ecuador’s SCPM Urges Suppliers Not to Take Advantage of Covid-19 to Increase Profit Margins’, PaRR.com (20 Mar 2020), available at https://app.parr-global.com/intelligence/view/prime-3004833.

11 ‘Peru’s INDECOPI, Colombia’s SIC Receiving Online Complaints Amid Covid-19’ (translated), PaRR.com (21 Mar 2020), available at https://app.parr-global.com/intelligence/view/prime-3005521.

12 Caio Rinaldi, ‘CADE’s Economic Department Cites Competition Concerns with Price-Gouging Bill in Brazil’s Congress’, MLex.com (3 Apr 2020), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=1176763&siteid=203&rdir=1.

13 Ana Paula Candil, ‘Pharmaceutical, Medical Industry Scrutinized for Price-Gouging in Brazil After Covid-19’s Spread’, MLex.com (18 Mar 2020), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=1171785&siteid=203&rdir=1; Ana Paula Candil, ‘Suppliers of Surgical Masks, Hand Sanitizers Accused of “Unjustifiable” Price-Gouging in Brazil’, MLex.com (20 Mar 2020), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=1172552&siteid=203&rdir=1.

14 ‘Farmalatam Targeted in Price-Gouging Probe in Colombia’, MLex.com (2 June 2020), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=1194444&siteid=203&rdir=1; ‘Inmadica Targeted in Colombian Price-Gouging Probe of Essential Products During Pandemic’, MLex.com (6 May 2020), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=1184886&siteid=203&rdir=1.

15 Ana Paula Candil, ‘Price-Gouging of Essential Products Under Scrutiny in Chile, FNE Head Says’, MLex.com (10 June 2020), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=1197146&siteid=203&rdir=1.

16 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Sixth Pharmaceutical Company Charged In Ongoing Criminal Antitrust Investigation (23 July 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/sixth-pharmaceutical-company-charged-ongoing-criminal-antitrust-investigation; Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Fifth Pharmaceutical Company Charged In Ongoing Criminal Antitrust Investigation (30 June 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/fifth-pharmaceutical-company-charged-ongoing-criminal-antitrust-investigation; Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Generic Pharmaceutical Company Admits to Fixing Price of Widely Used Cholesterol Medication (7 May 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/generic-pharmaceutical-company-admits-fixing-price-widely-used-cholesterol-medication; Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Major Generic Pharmaceutical Company Admits to Antitrust Crimes (2 Mar 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/major-generic-pharmaceutical-company-admits-antitrust-crimes; Press release, US Dep’t of Justice, Former Generic Pharmaceutical Executive Pleads Guilty for Role in Criminal Antitrust Conspiracy (14 Feb 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-generic-pharmaceutical-executive-pleads-guilty-role-criminal-antitrust-conspiracy; Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Generic Drug Executive Indicted on Antitrust and False Statements Charges (4 Feb 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/generic-drug-executive-indicted-antitrust-and-false-statement-charges; Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Second Pharmaceutical Company Admits to Price Fixing, Resolves Related False Claims Act Violations (3 Dec 2019) available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/second-pharmaceutical-company-admits-price-fixing-resolves-related-false-claims-act; Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Pharmaceutical Company Admits to Price Fixing in Violation of Antitrust Law, Resolves Related False Claims Act Violations (31 May 2019), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/pharmaceutical-company-admits-price-fixing-violation-antitrust-law-resolves-related-false; Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Former Top Generic Pharmaceutical Executives Charged with Price Fixing, Bid Rigging and Customer Allocation Conspiracies (14 Dec 2016), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-top-generic-pharmaceutical-executives-charged-price-fixing-bid-rigging-and-customer.

17 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Leading Cancer Treatment Center Admits to Antitrust Crime and Agrees to Pay $100 Million Criminal Penalty (30 Apr 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/leading-cancer-treatment-center-admits-antitrust-crime-and-agrees-pay-100-million-criminal.

18 Ana Paula Candil, ‘Individuals Linked to Danfoss, Octapharma fined in Brazilian Compressor, Blood-Products Cartel Probes’, MLex.com (15 Apr 2020), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=1179434&siteid=203&rdir=1.

19 ‘Siemens Healthcare, Medartis, Six Individuals Settle Bid-Rigging Cartel Probe Over Medical Devices in Brazil’, MLex.com (15 Apr 2020), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=1179283&siteid=203&rdir=1; ‘Timken’s Brazilian Subsidiary Settles Bearing Cartel Probe: Maquet Settles Two Medical Device Probes in Brazil’, MLex.com (27 Nov 2019), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=1146030&siteid=203&rdir=1.

20 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Former CEO Convicted of Fixing Prices for Canned Tuna (3 Dec 2019), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-ceo-convicted-fixing-prices-canned-tuna.

21 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Former Bumble Bee CEO Sentenced to Prison for Fixing Prices of Canned Tuna (16 June 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-bumble-bee-ceo-sentenced-prison-fixing-prices-canned-tuna.

22 Emily Craig, ‘Mexico extends tortilla cartel probe’, Global Competition Review (25 Mar 2020), available at www.globalcompetitionreview.com/article/1222325/mexico-extends-tortilla-cartel-probe.

23 ‘Biomar, Skretting, Ewos, Salmofood Should be Fined $70 Million in Salmon Feed Price-Fixing Probe, Chilean Regulator Says’, MLex.com (19 Dec 2020), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=1151835&siteid=203&rdir=1.

24 Seaman v Duke Univ., No. 1:15-CV-462, 2019 WL 4674758 (M.D.N.C. 25 Sept 2019).

25 Press Release, COFECE, COFECE investigates possible absolute monopolistic practices in the market for the recruitment of soccer players (7 Nov 2018), available at www.cofece.mx/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/COFECE-050-2018-English.pdf.

26 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Justice Department Announces Procurement Collusion Strike Force: a Coordinated National Response to Combat Antitrust Crimes and Related Schemes in Government Procurement, Grant and Program Funding (5 Nov 2019), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-procurement-collusion-strike-force-coordinated-national-response.

27 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim Delivers Remarks at the Procurement Collusion Strike Force Press Conference (5 Nov 2019), available at www.justice.gov/opa/speech/assistant-attorney-general-makan-delrahim-delivers-remarks-procurement-collusion-strike.

28 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim Presents Procurement Collusion Strike Force to the International Competition Community (16 June 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/assistant-attorney-general-makan-delrahim-presents-procurement-collusion-strike-force (‘We hope the Strike Force can serve as a model for other countries looking for innovative ways to more effectively fight bid rigging and other anticompetitive schemes that impact public procurement, and cheat taxpayers, all over the world.’).

29 Guidance on Enhancing Cross-Border Leniency Cooperation (June 2020), International Competition Network, available at www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/CWG-Leniency-Coordination-Guidance.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery; Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Antitrust Division Applauds New International Leniency Guidelines (10 June 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/antitrust-division-applauds-new-international-leniency-guidelines.

30 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Extradited Former Air Cargo Executive Pleads Guilty for Participating in a Worldwide Price-Fixing Conspiracy (23 Jan 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/extradited-former-air-cargo-executive-pleads-guilty-participating-worldwide-price-fixing.

31 Press Release, COFECE, COFECE blocked Walmart/Cornershop concentration (5 June 2019), available at www.cofece.mx/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/COFECE-032-2019-English.pdf.

32 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Statement of Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim on Sabre and Farelogix Decision to Abandon Merger (1 May 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-assistant-attorney-general-makan-delrahim-sabre-and-farelogix-decision-abandon.

33 Lindsay McKenzie, ‘“McCengage”’ Merger Called Off’, InsideHigherEd.com (5 May 2020), available at www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/05/05/cengage-and-mcgraw-hill-cancel-merger-plans.

34 United States v Novelis, No. 1:19-cv-02033-CAB (N.D. Ohio 4 Sept 2019).

35 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, DOJ and FTC Announce Draft Vertical Merger Guidelines for Public Comment (10 Jan 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/doj-and-ftc-announce-draft-vertical-merger-guidelines-public-comment.

36 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission Issue New Vertical Merger Guidelines (30 June 2020), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-and-federal-trade-commission-issue-new-vertical-merger-guidelines.

37 Press Release, US Dep’t of Justice, New Multilateral Framework on Procedures Approved by the International Competition Network (5 Apr 2019), available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/new-multilateral-framework-procedures-approved-international-competition-network; ICN Framework on Competition Agency Procedures, International Competition Network, available at www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/ICN_CAP.pdf.

38 CAP Templates, International Competition Network, available at www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/frameworks/competition-agency-procedures/cap-templates/.

39 The text of the competition law chapter of the USMCA is available at https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/FTA/USMCA/Text/21_Competition_Policy.pdf.

40 See footnote 21.

Unlock unlimited access to all Global Competition Review content