Two US-based companies that purchase vitamin C from sources abroad urged a federal appeals court on Tuesday, September 14, to revisit a panel decision that shut down an antitrust lawsuit claiming Chinese exporters had unlawfully conspired to fix the price and supply of the nutrient.
A 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals panel in August ordered the dismissal of the lawsuit against Chinese companies Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical and North China Pharmaceutical Group. The panel judges, voting 2-1, concluded there was a “true conflict” between US and Chinese antitrust law that meant the defendants could not comply with US legal provisions.
In their petition seeking en banc review or panel rehearing, lawyers for Texas-based Animal Science Products and New Jersey-based Ranis argued that the panel decision, if left in place, “invites judicial micromanagement of foreign policy powers reserved to the political branches.”
William Isaacson of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, did not immediately respond to a message on Wednesday seeking comment. Isaacson represents the plaintiffs with lawyers from Willkie Farr & Gallagher, Hausfeld and Susman Godfrey.
Jonathan Jacobson of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, who represents the Chinese company defendants, told Reuters on Wednesday that “the petition raises nothing remotely problematic with the court’s decision.”
Circuit Judge William Nardini, joined by Circuit Judge Jose Cabranes, concluded in the panel ruling that Chinese law required Hebei Welcome and North China Pharmaceutical “to engage in price-fixing of Vitamin C sold on the international market.”
Relevant Chinese regulations “required the defendants to collude on Vitamin C export prices and quantities as part and parcel of China’s export regime for Vitamin C,” Nardini wrote.
Circuit Judge Richard Wesley wrote the dissent, which disputed the majority’s conclusion that Chinese law required the defendants to coordinate on the price of vitamin C exports.
Isaacson and co-counsel for the plaintiffs asserted in their petition that the panel decision crafted a new test – without congressional support – to assess whether a key US antitrust law reaches conduct overseas.
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Walmart Withdraws and Refiles Antitrust Review Application for Vizio Acquisition
Mar 28, 2024 by
CPI
Apple Prevails in Dismissal of Crypto-Payment Antitrust Lawsuit
Mar 27, 2024 by
CPI
Amazon Fined in Poland for Misleading Customers
Mar 27, 2024 by
CPI
Credit Card Rewards Under Threat as Visa, Mastercard Settlement Impacts Swipe Fees
Mar 27, 2024 by
CPI
UK Fashion Giants Commit to Honest Environmental Claims
Mar 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Real Estate & Antitrust
Mar 27, 2024 by
CPI
Systematic National Evidence of Steering by Real Estate Agents
Mar 27, 2024 by
CPI
Compliance Now! Actionable Antitrust Advice for the Residential Real Estate Industry
Mar 27, 2024 by
CPI
Real Estate Commissions: Some Insights from the Economics of Multi-Sided Platforms
Mar 27, 2024 by
CPI
New Ideas for Promoting Real Estate Brokerage Price Competition
Mar 27, 2024 by
CPI