Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, WORTH NOTING: Other Antitrust and Trade Regulation developments, (Jan 23, 2026)

By WK Editorial Staff

A periodic roundup of other items of interest to the Antitrust and Trade Regulation community.

ADVERTISING—N.D. Ill.: A putative class action alleging that by making misleading statements on its “Lakanto Monkfruit Sweetener” product labels, defendant Saraya USA violated the laws of several states was transferred to the District of Utah, where defendant is incorporated and has its principal place of business, by the federal district court in Chicago. A dueling transfer motion by the plaintiff, requesting transfer to the Northern District of California where the case could be consolidated with a similar action, was denied. Because the plaintiff failed to show that defendant would have been subject to personal jurisdiction in California, the Northern District of California is not a district in which this case might have been brought. However, there was no dispute that this case could have been brought in the District of Utah, and transfer to Utah will best serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interests of justice (Kinman v. Saraya USA, Inc., No. 1:25-cv-07539 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 21, 2026)).

ANTITRUST NEWS: The U.K. Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is reviewing a number of existing market remedies to determine whether they are still required, in a bid to ease the burden on thousands of businesses. Market remedies are designed to fix competition problems identified during market investigations. The remedies under review cover several sectors including financial services, travel, and energy. The CMA has identified 33 market remedies (60% of all market remedies in place) which may no longer be needed to deal with problems they were designed to fix. The CMA is considering whether to remove remedies relating to the marketing practices of large travel businesses that were introduced over a decade ago, at a time when most travel was booked in-store, which would reduce compliance costs for these companies. Major retail banks could also benefit from scrapping rules around providing payment transaction histories to customers which they can now easily access online. A consultation will now take place until March 2nd.

ANTITRUST NEWS: Oral argument before the Commission in the FTC administrative proceeding against prescription drug benefit managers Caremark Rx, Express Scripts, Inc. (ESI), and OptumRx and their affiliated group purchasing organizations for allegedly artificially inflating the list price of insulin drugs was postponed at the request of FTC staff and the ESI respondents ESI, Evernorth Health, Inc., Medco Health Services, Inc., Ascent Health Services, LLC. Argument was originally scheduled for January 22, 2026. It was rescheduled for February 5, 2026. The matter was withdrawn from adjudication with respect to the ESI Respondents under FTC Rule 3.25(c) on January 20 to consider settlements (In the Matter of Caremark Rx, LLC, FTC Dkt. 9437).

ANTITRUST NEWS: A coalition of Republican Attorneys General sent a warning letter to climate activist group Ceres over concerns that its actions may violate antitrust and consumer protection laws. The letter explains that Ceres promotes efforts to “transform industries,” achieve “systemic changes,” and “change business practices.”

ANTITRUST NEWS: The European General Court rejected challenges to a December 2023 European Commission (EC) decision imposing a fine of €47.7 million on ethanol producer Lantmännen ek för, for participating in a cartel to influence the wholesale price formation mechanism on the European ethanol market. The court was not persuaded by an argument that the use of a staggered “hybrid” procedure, when the Commission adopts a settlement against only one party and continues to investigate others under the ordinary procedure, constituted a breach of the right to be presumed innocent. Also rejected was the contention that the EC failed to respect the duty of impartiality arising from the principle of sound administration (Lantmännen ek för v. European Commission, Case T-93/24).

ANTITRUST NEWS: The UK Competition & Markets Authority (CMA) is consulting on its draft Annual Plan for 2026 to 2027. This Annual Plan is the first detailed implementation plan under the CMA’s new 2026 to 2029 Strategy, which laid out our purpose of promoting competition and protecting consumers with a clear end goal in mind: to drive economic growth and improve household prosperity.

ACQUISITIONS & MERGERS NEWS: The Department of Justice requested additional information from Netflix, Inc. and Warner Bros. Discovery, Inc. (WBD) in light proposed transaction between the companies, according to a filing with the SEC. Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos will testify before Congress on the possible antitrust implications of the acquisition.

ACQUISITIONS & MERGERS NEWS: In light of Edwards Lifesciences Corp. dropping its proposed acquisition of JenaValve Technology, Inc., the FTC and Edwards jointly moved to dismiss the complaint. The FTC had challenged the proposed transaction based on concerns that the acquisition would limit patient access to lifesaving medical devices used to treat a potentially fatal heart condition. The agency alleged that the deal threatens to eliminate the existing vigorous head-to-head competition in the market because it would collect under one roof the only two transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) device companies conducting ongoing clinical trials with the FDA (In the Matter of Edwards Lifesciences Corp., FTC Dkt. No. 9442).

CONSUMER PROTECTION NEWS: Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) urged the Department of Justice and the FTC to renew Robinson-Patman Act enforcement and prevent economic discrimination against small and medium-sized businesses, particularly in the grocery and agriculture industries. The letter cited reports that it is increasingly difficult for consumers to access essential goods and services traditionally provided by local grocers and pharmacies, due to discriminatory behavior by firms or intermediaries with market power. Also, concentrated market power has caused downstream effects that unnecessarily disrupt the supply chain for small and medium-sized businesses.

CONSUMER PROTECTION NEWS: The FTC released the agenda for its January 28, 2026, workshop that will examine a range of issues related to age verification and estimation technologies. The workshop, which will be held online and in-person, will explore age verification and estimation technologies, which can help companies obtain age information of potential visitors to websites and other online services.

CONSUMER PROTECTION—W.D. Wash.: Nike’s motion to dismiss a consumer’s complaint alleging violation of Washington’s Commercial Electronic Mail Act (“CEMA”) and the Washington Consumer Protection Act (“CPA”) by sending commercial e-mails to the consumer containing false or misleading information in the subject line was denied by the federal district court in Seattle. The consumer alleged that he received multiple commercial e-mails from Nike between 2022 and 2024 that falsely claimed that Nike was offering discounts or sales that expired after a specific period of time. Nike argued the court should dismiss the complaint because: (1) the CEMA claim is preempted by the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing (“CAN-SPAM”) Act, 15 U.S.C. § 7701, et seq., (2) the first amended complaint fails to comply with Rule 9(b)’s heightened pleading standard, and (3) the CPA claim is derivative of his preempted CEMA claim. Construing the amended complaint in the light most favorable to the consumer, the CEMA claim is not preempted by the CAN-SPAM Act, the court held, finding the claim did not fall under the CAN-SPAM Act’s express preemption clause and it plausibly alleges that Nike’s practice of deceptive subject-line e-mails misleads recipients as to the availability and duration of the sales promotion, affecting consumer behavior. Second, even if Rule 9(b) applies, the consumer met the heightened pleading standard by pleading the who, what, where, why, and how of his claim, along with setting forth what was false or misleading about the subject lines in Nike’s emails. Finally, because the court denied Nike’s motion to dismiss the CEMA claim, it similarly denied the motion to dismiss the derivative CPA claim (Ma v. Nike, Inc., No. 2:25-cv-01235-JLR (W.D. Wash. Jan. 14, 2026)).

UNFAIR COMPETITION—C.D. Cal.: A Magnuson-Moss Act case brought by a purchaser of a used 2023 Nissan Rogue who alleged defects in the vehicle was properly removed to federal court at the request of defendant Nissan North America, Inc. because the amount in controversy exceeded the $50,000 jurisdictional requirement under the Act or $75,000 for diversity jurisdiction considering both actual damages and a civil penalty under California law. The plaintiff unsuccessfully contended that the civil penalty should not be included in the amount in controversy (Mauricio Caballero v. Nissan North America, Inc., No. 5:25-cv-03089-KK-DTB (C.D. Cal. Jan. 20, 2026)).

Attorneys: Michelle Yang (Prestige Legal Solutions, P.C.) for Mauricio Caballero. Richard J. May (ortenson Taggart Adams LLP) for Nissan North America, Inc. Michael James Aschenbrener (KamberLaw LLP) for Valerie Kinman. Juliette P. White (Parsons Behle & Latimer LLP) for Saraya USA, Inc. d/b/a Lakanto. Samuel J. Strauss (Strauss Borrelli PLLC) for Harrison Ma. Gabrielle K. Lindquist (Stoel Rives LLP) for Nike Inc.

Companies: Netflix, Inc.; Warner Bros. Discovery, Inc.; Edwards Lifesciences Corp.; JenaValve Technology, Inc.; Caremark Rx LLC; Zinc Health Services, LLC; Express Scripts, Inc.; Evernorth Health, Inc.; Medco Health Services, Inc.; Ascent Health Services LLC; Nissan North America, Inc.; Ceres; Lantmännen ek för; Saraya USA, Inc. d/b/a Lakanto; Nike Inc.

News: AcquisitionsMergers Antitrust Advertising AntitrustDivisionNews ConsumerProtection CaliforniaNews FederalTradeCommissionNews IllinoisNews WashingtonNews