Pink Sheet is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By


Whole Foods merger complaint

This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet

Executive Summary

The Federal Trade Commission issues an amended complaint Sept. 8 against Whole Foods' acquisition of Wild Oats Markets, claiming the already-completed merger is "substantially reducing or eliminating competition in the operation of premium natural and organic supermarkets" in several geographic markets. The respondent has until Sept. 26 to file a response. FTC's complaint follows a same-day scheduling conference in which an administrative law judge from the agency laid out a timeline for filings and discovery leading up to a hearing before the commission on Feb. 16, 2009. The amended complaint filing was enabled by a July decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which reversed a lower court's ruling against FTC's motion for a preliminary injunction against the merger (1"The Tan Sheet" Aug. 18, 2008, p. 6). Whole Foods filed a petition Aug. 26 for a rehearing before the appeals court

You may also be interested in...

Whole Foods Merger Ruling Could “Embolden” Antitrust Activity – Attorney

An appeals court's questions about a merger in a key market for dietary supplement manufacturers - the Whole Foods/Wild Oats Markets deal - may impede similar deals across all U.S. industries, an antitrust law expert says

AstraZeneca's Risky Lynparza Endpoint In Pancreatic Cancer Goes Before Advisory Cmte.

US FDA usually recommends using overall survival for pancreatic cancer drugs, but AstraZeneca choose progression-free survival; now ODAC will weigh in on whether the PARP inhibitor olaparib demonstrated a clinically meaningful impact. The firm cites enrollment and design challenges in the gBRCAm population as reasons for using PFS.

Did Sarepta Need To Tell Investors About Its Vyondys 53 Dispute Resolution Request?

Attorneys say Sarepta did not have an obligation to report its appeal, particularly since winning a formal dispute filing with the US FDA is a long shot.





Ask The Analyst

Please Note: You can also Click below Link for Ask the Analyst
Ask The Analyst

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts