Markets Wired - Page 1199 of 1415 - Global Financial Market News and Press Releases

Statement of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition Regarding the Announcement that CSL Will Not Proceed with its Proposed Acquisition of Talecris Biotherapeutics

Following the Federal Trade Commission’s filing of a lawsuit to block the transaction, CSL Limited announced on June 8, 2009, that it will not proceed with its proposed $3.1 billion acquisition of Talecris Biotherapeutics. The FTC’s complaint charged that the deal would be illegal and would substantially reduce competition in the U.S. markets for four plasma-derivative protein therapies – Immune globulin (Ig), Albumin, Rho-D, and Alpha-1. These therapies are used to treat patients suffering from illnesses such as primary immunodeficiency diseases, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, alpha-1 antitrypsin disease, and hemolytic disease of the newborn.

“Yesterday’s announcement is a tremendous victory for the patients who rely on these life-sustaining treatments. Rising health care costs are a burden to all too many Americans. Blocking this deal helps prevent additional price increases,” said Richard Feinstein, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition. “If consummated, the proposed combination of CSL and Talecris would have increased the likelihood of collusion in these critical markets and led to higher healthcare costs and reduced innovation. As shown in our court filings, Commission staff gathered an impressive amount of evidence and was fully prepared to demonstrate the anticompetitive harm that would have resulted from this acquisition.”

The FTC’s Bureau of Competition works with the Bureau of Economics to investigate alleged anticompetitive business practices and, when appropriate, recommends that the Commission take law enforcement action. To inform the Bureau about particular business practices, call 202-326-3300, send an e-mail to [email protected], or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Room 394, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Ave, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read “Competition Counts” at http://www.ftc.gov/competitioncounts.

(FTC File No. 081-2255)

FTC Announces Actions Against Kmart, Tender and Dyna-E Alleging Deceptive ‘Biodegradable’ Claims

The FTC has charged Kmart Corp., Tender Corp., and Dyna-E International with making false and unsubstantiated claims that their paper products were “biodegradable.” Kmart and Tender have agreed to settle the cases against them; the case against Dyna-E will be litigated. The FTC announced the cases today in testimony before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The testimony states that with the recent growth in “green” advertising and product lines, the agency will continue its efforts to ensure that environmental marketing is truthful, substantiated, and not confusing to consumers.

Administrative Complaints Against Kmart, Tender, and Dyna-E for “Biodegradable” Claims. In the three complaints announced today, the FTC charged retailers with making deceptive and unsubstantiated biodegradability claims: Kmart Corp. called its American Fare brand disposable plates biodegradable, Tender Corp. called its Fresh Bath-brand moist wipes biodegradable, and Dyna-E International called its Lightload brand compressed dry towels biodegradable.

Since 1992, the FTC’s “Green Guides” have advised marketers that unqualified biodegradable claims are acceptable only if they have scientific evidence that their product will completely decompose within a reasonably short period of time under customary methods of disposal. In the three complaints announced today, the FTC alleged that the defendants’ products typically are disposed in landfills, incinerators, or recycling facilities, where it is impossible for waste to biodegrade within a reasonably short time.

Kmart and Tender have agreed to orders that bar them from making deceptive “degradable” product claims and require them to have competent and reliable evidence to support environmental product claims. The settlement with Tender also requires it to disclose clearly whether any biodegradable claim applies to the product, the packaging, or component of either. Both settlements contain record-keeping and reporting provisions to assist the FTC in monitoring the companies’ compliance. The third matter, against Dyna-E and its owner, George Wheeler, will proceed in administrative litigation.

Testimony Before Congress on Deceptive Environmental Claims. According to the testimony presented by James A. Kohm, Associate Director of the Enforcement Division in the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, the Commission does not set environmental standards or policy, but rather protects consumers from unfair or deceptive practices. To achieve this goal in the environmental arena, the FTC issues rules and guides for businesses, publishes materials to help consumers make informed purchasing decisions, and challenges fraudulent and deceptive advertising through law enforcement actions, such as the three biodegradability cases announced today.

The FTC’s Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims (Green Guides) are the centerpiece of the agency’s environmental marketing efforts, according to the testimony. The Green Guides help marketers avoid making false or misleading green claims by explaining how consumers understand commonly used terms, such as “biodegradable” and “recyclable,” and by describing the basic elements needed to substantiate those claims. As part of the FTC’s current review of the Green Guides, the agency has held a series of workshops and plans to study consumers’ understanding of particular claims, such as “sustainable” and “carbon neutral,” which were not common when the FTC last updated its Guides.

The testimony also noted that the Commission recently completed a rulemaking proceeding to improve the usefulness of the EnergyGuide Label, which helps consumers comparison shop for energy-efficient appliances. In addition, the FTC is reviewing the effectiveness of its required lighting disclosures in helping consumers understand newer, high-efficiency compact fluorescent and LED bulbs.

In addition, the testimony stated that the Commission creates and distributes materials to help consumers make informed purchasing decisions about “green” products and avoid energy-saving scams. For example, the agency’s interactive Web site, “Saving Starts @ Home” (www.ftc.gov/energysavings), offers tips to help consumers conserve energy and save money in almost every room of their homes. At www.ftc.gov/savegas, consumers can find bumper-to-bumper tips for improving the fuel efficiency of their cars.

The Commission votes to approve the Commission testimony, to approve the two administrative complaints and proposed settlement agreements, and to issue the administrative complaint, were 4-0. The FTC will publish an announcement regarding the two consent agreements in the Federal Register shortly. The two agreements will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through July 9, 2009, after which the Commission will decide whether to make them final. To file a public comment on either of the two consent agreements, please click on one of the following two hyperlinks — http://www.ftc.gov/os/2009/06/0823186publiccomment.pdf or http://www.ftc.gov/os/2009/06/0823188publiccomment.pdf — and follow the instructions at that site.

NOTE: The Commission issues or files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the named parties have violated the law.

NOTE: A consent agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission of a law violation. When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of $16,000.

Copies of the complaint, the proposed settlement agreement, and an analysis of the agreement to aid in public comment are available from both the FTC’s Web site at http://www.ftc.gov, and the FTC’s Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 1,500 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s Web site provides free information on a variety of consumer topics.

(FTC File Nos. 082-3186, 082-3187, and 082-3188)
(GreenGuidesKmart)

Chairman, Commissioners Issue Statement on Endocare, Inc.s Announcement That it has Terminated its Merger Agreement with Galil Medical Ltd.

Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz, Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour, and Commissioner William E. Kovacic have issued a joint statement in response to the announcement by Endocare, Inc., that it has terminated its merger agreement with Galil Medical Ltd. during the agency’s ongoing investigation.

The statement can be found on the agency’s Web site and as a link to this press release. Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch has also released a statement in response to the announcement by Endocare. The statements are the only publicly available documents regarding this matter.

Copies of the documents mentioned in this release are available from the FTC’s Web site at http://www.ftc.gov and from the FTC’s Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. Call toll-free: 1-877-FTC-HELP.

(FYI 27.5.2009.wpd)

Commission Grants, in Part, Petition of Hexion LLC and Huntsman Corporation to Reopen and Set Aside Orders

Following a public comment period, the Commission has granted, in part, a petition by Hexion LLC and Huntsman Corporation requesting that two FTC Orders related to their proposed merger be reopened and set aside. The agency has determined that the firms have satisfactorily shown that changed conditions require that the matter be reopened. In particular, the firms have abandoned the acquisition that the Orders were intended to remedy. In its decision, the Commission has set aside the Asset Maintenance Order in its entirety, as well as the Decision and Order regarding Huntsman.

The Commission also found that there is a credible risk that Hexion could revive its effort to acquire Huntsman. Accordingly, the agency determined it is in the public interest to require Hexion to seek the Commission’s approval before any merger or other combination with Huntsman. The Commission also modified the Decision and Order as to Hexion to add a prior-approval provision. Under the order, Hexion is required to obtain Commission approval before it acquires any voting or nonvoting stock, share capital, equity, notes convertible into any voting or non-voting stock, or certain assets of Huntsman.

The Commission vote to reopen and set aside the Orders in part, was 4-0. (FTC Docket No. C-4235; the staff contact is Roberta Baruch, Bureau of Competition, 202-326-2861; see press releases dated October 2, 2008, at http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2008/10/hexion.shtm and February 10, 2009, at http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2009/02/pbshexion.shtm.)

(FYI 28.2009.wpd)

FTC Returns an Additional $8 Million to Borrowers from First Alliance Mortgage Company Settlement

The Federal Trade Commission has mailed more than $8 million in redress checks to more than 15,000 people who obtained home mortgage loans through subprime lender First Alliance Mortgage Company (FAMCO). In 2002, the FTC had charged FAMCO with violating federal law in making home equity loans. The FTC alleged that the company misled consumers about the existence and amount of origination fees for its loans, and the interest rate and monthly payments of their adjustable rate mortgage loans. FAMCO marketed its loans to the subprime market, which included homeowners with poor credit ratings who might not have been able to qualify for conventional loans. This is the final compensation to be distributed in this matter; the FTC previously distributed more than $66 million to FAMCO customers.

The redress fund was established in 2002 when FAMCO (since liquidated in bankruptcy) and related defendants reached a joint settlement with the FTC, Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, New York, Massachusetts, AARP, and private plaintiffs. The FTC initially distributed checks to consumers in December 2002. The redress fund received additional money in 2003, and the Commission mailed a second round of refund checks in January 2004. With additional funds collected in 2009 in accordance with the settlement agreement, in May 2009 the agency mailed checks to borrowers who cashed the previous checks. Borrowers who received a $500 lump sum in the first round of the distribution did not receive additional checks because they were part of a prior private settlement in Dunning v. First Alliance.

The FTC maintains a Web site with details about the settlement and redress at www.ftc.gov/famco. For more information, call the FTC’s toll-free hotline at 1-877-862-0886.

(FAMCO)

FTC Officials Promote Recommended Practices to Improve Merger Analysis and Address Unilateral Conduct Issues at International Competition Network Conference

Federal Trade Commission officials worked with officials from more than 80 antitrust agencies worldwide at the eighth annual International Competition Network (ICN) conference in Zurich, Switzerland, to adopt new Recommended Practices for substantive merger analysis. ICN participants also discussed two new reports on the analysis of tying and bundled discounting, and loyalty discounts and rebates under unilateral conduct laws.

The ICN conference, hosted by the Swiss Competition Commission, was held on June 3-5, 2009. More than 450 delegates participated, representing over 80 antitrust agencies from around the world, and competition experts from international organizations and the legal, business, consumer, and academic communities.

In October 2001, the FTC and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) joined with antitrust agencies from 13 other jurisdictions around the world (Australia, Canada, the European Union, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, South Africa, the United Kingdom and Zambia) to create the ICN. The ICN now includes 107 member agencies from 96 jurisdictions. The goal of the ICN is to provide a forum for antitrust agencies to address antitrust enforcement and policy issues of common interest and formulate proposals for procedural and substantive convergence through a results-oriented agenda and structure.

FTC Commissioner William E. Kovacic, who serves as the ICN Vice Chair for Outreach, and Christine A. Varney, Assistant Attorney General in charge of DOJ’s Antitrust Division were among the U.S. delegates who participated in the conference. The conference showcased the recent work of ICN working groups on mergers, unilateral conduct, cartels, competition advocacy, and competition policy implementation.

“The ICN is making impressive progress toward fulfilling a central aim that motivated its creation: to be a demand-driven institution that promotes acceptance of superior methods, enables agencies to understand more deeply their common interests and differences, and to realize, through collective action, results that elude individual initiative,” Commissioner Kovacic said.

“The ICN plays a central role in promoting collaboration among antitrust authorities from around the world,” Assistant Attorney General Varney said. “The Antitrust Division is committed to participating fully in ICN efforts to promote international convergence in antitrust enforcement and explore ways in which we can pursue our shared enforcement goals.”

Based on the work of the Merger Working Group, co-chaired by the Antitrust Division and the Irish Competition Authority, ICN members adopted three new Recommended Practices for Merger Analysis. The new Recommended Practices for merger analysis address:

Competitive Effects Analysis in Horizontal Merger Review. Agencies should conduct competitive effects analysis to assess whether a merger is likely to harm competition significantly by creating or enhancing market power. Competitive effects analysis should be clearly grounded in both sound economics and the facts of the particular case.
Unilateral Effects. In analyzing the potential for a merger to result in anticompetitive unilateral effects, agencies should assess whether the merger will create or enhance the merged firm’s ability or incentive to exercise market power independently. Agencies should apply the economic theory or model that best fits the characteristics of the market at issue, and assess the competitive constraints and other factors relevant to the merged firm’s ability to exercise market power.
Coordinated Effects. In analyzing the potential for a merger to result in anticompetitive coordinated effects, agencies should assess whether the merger increases the likelihood that firms in the market will successfully coordinate their behavior or strengthen existing coordination. Agencies should assess whether the conditions that are generally necessary for successful coordination are present, and the extent to which competitive constraints and other factors would likely deter or disrupt effective coordination.

The Merger Working Group also presented a detailed report, presented by the Notification and Procedures subgroup chaired by Cynthia Lewis Lagdameo of the FTC’s Office of International Affairs, on the ways in which agencies address information requirements in the initial notification of a merger. In addition, Assistant Attorney General Varney moderated a Merger Working Group panel discussion on “Merger Analysis in Troubled Times.”

The conference highlighted the work of the Unilateral Conduct Working Group, which was established to promote analytical convergence and sound enforcement of laws governing unilateral conduct by firms with substantial market power. Co-chaired by the FTC and the German Bundeskartellamt, the Working Group presented reports on the analysis of tying and bundled discounting and on the analysis of single-product loyalty discounts and rebates in over 30 jurisdictions.

Randolph W. Tritell, Director of the FTC’s Office of International Affairs and Co-chair of the Working Group, opened the group’s panel on “Distinguishing Pro from Anticompetive Conduct: The Fine Line Between Aggressive Competition and Anticompetitive Foreclosure in Tying and Discounting Cases.” Speaking on behalf of Chairman Leibowitz, Tritell highlighted the FTC’s unique authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act to stop unfair conduct that harms consumers but that may not be reached by other antitrust laws.

“The Unilateral Conduct Working Group is continuing to build a body of knowledge on which enforcers and policy-makers around the world can draw to assist them in implementing their competition laws in this complex area,” said Tritell.

In addition, the ICN conference highlighted the work of the Cartel Working Group, which aims to improve the ability of antitrust agencies to crack cartels through the exchange of effective investigative techniques and the examination of important legal and policy topics. In Zurich, the Cartel Working Group conducted panel discussions on transitioning to criminal sanctions and the use of effective investigative techniques.

“The Antitrust Division is working closely with enforcers abroad to combat international cartels that victimize businesses and consumers around the globe. There is a growing recognition in this effort that the surest way to deter these conspiracies is by imposing stiff criminal sanctions on the individuals who perpetrate these crimes,” said Scott D. Hammond, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Criminal Enforcement of the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division. “In many jurisdictions where the punishment for cartel offenses has historically been limited to administrative fines against companies, laws adopting criminal sanctions against individuals for cartel offenses are now being introduced. The ICN provides a valuable forum for agencies to share their experiences and ideas in addressing the challenges of transitioning to a criminal antitrust enforcement regime.”

The Advocacy Working Group presented two reports. One addresses the results of a survey of ICN members on their experience with market studies and the other makes recommendations for future ICN work in the field of competition advocacy. The plenary session also addressed advocacy in an economic downturn, highlighting the need for competition agencies to be an advocate for competition principles.

The Competition Policy Implementation Working Group held a plenary session on agency effectiveness. FTC Counsel for International Antitrust, Maria Coppola Tineo, participated, praising the trend toward increased emphasis on institutional design and implementation, and the growing recognition that institutional arrangements affect substantive policy results. The Group also reported on a January 2009 workshop on agency effectiveness attended by agency leaders from more than 60 jurisdictions. Russell Damtoft, Associate Director of the FTC’s Office of International Affairs, reported on a new initiative to promote online sharing of experiences among ICN members.

The conference host presented a special project on competition law in small economies.

ICN members also elected John Fingleton, Chief Executive Officer of the United Kingdom’s Office of Fair Trading, to a two-year term as Chair of the ICN Steering Group.

ICN documents are available at www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org.

(ICN.2009.final)

Teach Your Dad About Phishing this Fathers Day

The Federal Trade Commission’s Father’s Day e-card is the perfect gift for the man who already has enough ties. But even more important, it can save your dad a whole lot of headaches. Available from the FTC in English and Spanish at http://www.ftc.gov/dad and http://www.ftc.gov/padre, the cards offer dads advice on keeping their personal information secure. To see the You Tube video version of this card, go to http://www.youtube.com/ftcvideos.

Help your dad figure out how to spot fraud on the Internet. When Internet scam artists go “phishing,” they send spam e-mails or pop-up messages asking for personal information, Social Security numbers, and/or passwords. To gain the trust of those they wish to con, these hustlers often pose as representatives of a bank or credit union, an e-commerce site, or a government agency.

Send your dad this card, and keep him from getting hooked by Internet con artists.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 1,500 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s Web site provides free information on a variety of consumer topics.

(FYI FD Phishing 09)

FTC Approves Final Consent Order Related to Reed Elsevier NV and ChoicePoint Inc.

For Your Information

June 5, 2009

Following a public comment period, the Commission has approved a final consent order in the matter of Reed Elsevier NV and ChoicePoint Inc. and authorized the staff to send letters to the commenters of record. The vote approving the final order was 4-0. (FTC File No. 081-0133; the staff contact is Brendan McNamara, Bureau of Competition, 202-326-3703; see press release dated September 16, 2008, at http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2008/09/choicepoint.shtm.)

Copies of the documents mentioned in this release are available from the FTC’s Web site at http://www.ftc.gov and from the FTC’s Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. Call toll-free: 1-877-FTC-HELP.

(FYI 27.2009.wpd)

Contact Information

Media Contact:

Office of Public Affairs
202-326-2180

Sears Settles FTC Charges Regarding Tracking Software

Sears Holdings Management Corporation – owned by Sears, Roebuck and Company and Kmart Management Corporation – has agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it failed to disclose adequately the scope of consumers’ personal information it collected via a downloadable software application. According to the FTC’s administrative complaint, Sears represented to consumers that the software would track their “online browsing.” The FTC charges that the software would also monitor consumers’ online secure sessions – including sessions on third parties’ Web sites – and collect information transmitted in those sessions, such as the contents of shopping carts, online bank statements, drug prescription records, video rental records, library borrowing histories, and the sender, recipient, subject, and size for web-based e-mails. The software would also track some computer activities that were not related to the Internet. The proposed settlement calls for Sears to stop collecting data from the consumers who downloaded the software and to destroy all data it had previously collected.

According to the FTC’s complaint, Sears invited certain consumers visiting the sears.com and kmart.com Web sites to become members of the “My SHC Community.” Sears solicited these consumers to “participate in exciting, engaging, and on-going interactions – always on your terms and always by your choice.” Sears paid consumers $10 to participate. As part of this process, Sears asked consumers to download “research” software that it said would confidentially track their “online browsing.” Only in a lengthy user license agreement, available to consumers at the end of a multi-step registration process, did Sears disclose the full extent of the information the software tracked, according to the complaint. The complaint charges that Sears’ failure to adequately disclose the scope of the tracking software’s data collection was
deceptive and violates the FTC Act.

Under the proposed settlement, in addition to destroying information previously collected, if Sears advertises or disseminates any tracking software in the future, it must clearly and prominently disclose the types of data the software will monitor, record, or transmit. This disclosure must be made prior to installation and separate from any user license agreement. Sears must also disclose whether any of the data will be used by a third party.

The Commission vote to approve the administrative complaint and proposed settlement agreement was 4-0. The settlement contains standard reporting and record-keeping provisions to allow the agency to monitor compliance. The FTC will publish an announcement regarding the agreement in the Federal Register shortly. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through July 6, 2009, after which the Commission will decide whether to make it final. To file a public comment, please click on the following hyperlink: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2009/06/0823099publiccomment.pdf and follow the instructions at that site.

Copies of the complaint, the proposed settlement agreement, and an analysis of the agreement to aid in public comment are available from both the FTC’s Web site at http://www.ftc.gov, and the FTC’s Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 1,500 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s Web site provides free information on a variety of consumer topics.

(FTC File No. 0823099)

FTC Settles Price-Fixing Charges Against San Francisco Bay Area Doctors Group

Alta Bates Medical Group, Inc. (Alta Bates), a 600-physician independent practice association serving the Berkeley and Oakland, California, area, has agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it violated federal antitrust law by fixing prices charged to health care insurers. A proposed consent order would prohibit Alta Bates from collectively negotiating fee-for-service reimbursements and engaging in related anticompetitive conduct.

The FTC’s complaint focuses on Alta Bates’s contracts with health plans to provide fee-for-service medical care. Under these arrangements, the payor compensates physicians for services pursuant to agreed-upon fee schedules. According to the complaint, since at least 2001, Alta Bates has orchestrated collective negotiations for fee-for-service contracts. Alta Bates proposed, rejected, and countered offers to insurers without consulting with its individual physician members regarding the prices each independently would accept and transmitted the insurers’ offers to its individual physician members only after the group had approved the negotiated prices.

In addition to price-fixing of fee-for-service reimbursements, the FTC’s complaint alleges an unlawful concerted refusal to deal. The complaint alleges that this conduct constituted an attempt to limit Kaiser’s product offerings to consumers. Although Alta Bates’s refusal to deal was ultimately unsuccessful, the sole purpose of this action was to impede competition in the provision of physician services in and around Berkeley and Oakland.

The FTC’s complaint charges that Alta Bates did not engage in any activity that might justify collective agreements on the prices its members would accept for their services from insurers under fee-for-service arrangements. For example, the physicians in Alta Bates have not clinically or financially integrated their practices to create efficiencies sufficient to justify the complained of conduct. As a consequence, Alta Bates’s actions have restrained price and other forms of competition among physicians in the Berkeley and Oakland, California area and harmed consumers by increasing the prices for physician services, according to the FTC’s complaint.

Alta Bates also has negotiated group contracts with insurers under which it receives a flat monthly fee for each enrollee (“capitated” payments), which shift the risk of patient illness to Alta Bates and its physicians. The complaint does not challenge Alta Bates’s activities concerning these contracts.

The proposed consent order is designed to prevent the continuance and recurrence of the illegal conduct alleged in the complaint while allowing Alta Bates to engage in legitimate joint conduct. The proposed order, which would not affect Alta Bates’s activities in contracting with insurers on a capitated basis, otherwise would prohibit Alta Bates from entering into or facilitating any price-fixing or concerted refusals to deal.

As in other Commission orders addressing health care providers’ collective bargaining with health care insurers, certain kinds of agreements are excluded from the general bar on joint negotiations. Notably, the proposed order would not preclude Alta Bates from engaging in conduct reasonably necessary to form or participate in legitimate “qualified risk-sharing” or “qualified clinically-integrated” joint arrangements, as defined in the proposed order.

In addition, the proposed order would require Alta Bates to notify the Commission before it initiates certain contacts with insurers, to distribute copies of the complaint and consent order to its physician members, its management and staff, and certain insurers, and to terminate, without penalty, certain pre-existing payor contracts to eliminate the effects of Alta Bates’s illegal collective behavior.

The Commission vote to place the proposed consent order on the public record for comment and publish a copy in the Federal Register was 4-0. The Commission is accepting comments on the proposed order for 30 days, until July 6, 2009, after which it will decide whether to make them final. Comments should be sent to: FTC Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20580. To file a public comment electronically, please click on: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2009/06/0510260publiccomment.pdf and follow the instructions at that site.

NOTE: The Commission authorizes the filing of a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendants actually have violated the law.

Copies of the proposed consent order are available now on the FTC’s Web site and as a link to this press release. The FTC’s Bureau of Competition works with the Bureau of Economics to investigate alleged anticompetitive business practices and, when appropriate, recommends that the Commission take law enforcement action. To inform the Bureau about particular business practices, call 202-326-3300, send an e-mail to [email protected], or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Room 383, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Ave, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read “Competition Counts” at http://www.ftc.gov/competitioncounts.

(FTC File No. 051-0260)
(Alta Bates.final.wpd)

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Contact Information

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts: