United States: Takeaways From The Ninth Circuit's Opinion Affirming The FTC's Victory Against The St. Luke's/Saltzer Merger

Last Updated: February 18 2015
Article by Daniel J. Howley, Charles F. (Rick) Rule and Eric Sega

Most Read Contributor in United States, December 2018

On February 10, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court's ruling that St. Luke's Health System's acquisition of the independent physician group Saltzer Medical Group violated the antitrust laws.  This appellate victory is another in a series of recent government wins.  More importantly, this case demonstrates that courts are unlikely to deviate from traditional antitrust merger analysis even when a transaction arguably furthers the "laudable" goals of high-profile legislation, such as the Affordable Care Act ("ACA").


Below are some practical takeaways from the decision:

  • Efficiencies Defenses Are Viewed With Skepticism, Even When They Relate To The ACA's Goals.  The Ninth Circuit stated that whether efficiencies could be used as a merger "defense in this circuit remains uncertain" and that it "remain[s] skeptical about the efficiencies defenses in general and about its scope in particular."  Among other arguments, St. Luke's argued that the merger would allow St. Luke's to move towards the integrated care and risk-based reimbursement encouraged by the ACA.  The Ninth Circuit concluded that although "better service to patients" was "a laudable goal," "the Clayton Act does not excuse mergers that lessen competition or create monopolies simply because the merged entity can improve its operations."  Put another way, the Ninth Circuit agreed with the district court that the parties' efficiencies arguments, which some would say were consistent with the ACA's recognition of benefits of integration, did not outweigh the likelihood of anticompetitive effects from the merger.
  • Market Definition Remains Critical.  Once the FTC was able to establish that the relevant geographic market was limited to the small Idaho city of Nampa, the FTC was easily able to obtain a legal presumption based on market shares/concentration that the transaction was anticompetitive.  As in many merger cases, this legal presumption proved decisive.  When forced to prove their case in litigation, the agencies rely heavily on market definition and concentration in order to try to benefit from this legal presumption, despite the fact that 2010 Merger Guidelines appear to minimize the importance of market definition and concentration in evaluating a merger. 


As described in more detail in our prior article discussing the district court opinion in this matter, St. Luke's follows on a series of FTC's wins against the transactions in ProMedica Health System (2011), Rockford Health System (2012) and Phoebe Putney (2013), and the FTC's success in administrative litigation and the related appeals involving the consummated deal in Polypore (2013).1

In 2012, St. Luke's, a healthcare system operating in and around Nampa, Idaho, acquired Saltzer Medical Group P.A., Idaho's largest independent, multi-specialty physician practice group in a transaction that did not require an HSR filing.  The FTC filed a complaint to block the acquisition on March 12, 2013.2  After a 19-day trial, the district court ruled that the transaction violated Section 7 of the Clayton Act and ordered divestiture.  

On appeal, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the district court did not clearly err in finding that the relevant market was limited to Adult Primary Care Services sold to commercially insured patients in Nampa, Idaho.  The defendants disputed the geographic market definition, but the Ninth Circuit was unconvinced in part because the evidence indicated that in the event of a small but significant non-transitory increase in price, neither insurers nor consumers would "change their behavior."  The Ninth Circuit explained that the district court "correctly focused" on the likely response of insurers because insurers, as opposed to patients, are the "direct purchasers."  The court noted that patients are "largely insensitive" to price and the residents of Nampa "strongly prefer access to local" primary care.  As a result, insurers "must offer" Adult Primary Care Services in Nampa "to effectively compete" for Nampa residents and could not "defend against" a price increase by "steering consumers to non-Nampa" primary care physicians.

With a narrow geographic market definition in hand, the government established its prima facie case on the basis of concentration levels in that market.  The post-merger Herfindahl-Hirschman Index ("HHI") in the market was 6,219 and the change in HHI as a result of the merger was 1,607, which was "well above the thresholds for a presumptively anticompetitive merger."3

The Ninth Circuit also concluded that the district court did not clearly err in ruling that the defendants' efficiencies arguments failed to rebut the presumption. St. Luke's argued that the merger would allow it to move towards the integrated care and risk-based reimbursement encouraged by the ACA, and would also benefit patients through the broader use of St. Luke's electronic medical records system.  The court ruled these efficiencies were not merger specific (i.e., the merger was not necessary to realize the efficiencies), and that, even if they were merger specific, they did not adequately rebut the government's prima facie case.  The Ninth Circuit concluded that although "better service to patients" was "a laudable goal," "the Clayton Act does not excuse mergers that lessen competition or create monopolies simply because the merged entity can improve its operations." 

Finally, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the district court did not err in ordering St. Luke's to divest Saltzer as the appropriate remedy.  St. Luke's argued that the district court abused its discretion in ordering divestiture—and should have ordered a conduct remedy that would have allowed the parties to remain merged—because divestiture would not restore competition and would eliminate the claimed benefits of the transaction.  The Ninth Circuit rejected this argument, noting that divestiture is the "customary form of relief" and that the district court had "ample basis" because, among other things, St. Luke's had previously assured the district court that divestiture was feasible.


1 Polypore Int'l v. F.T.C., 686 F.3d 1208 (11th Cir. 2012); F.T.C. v. Phoebe Putney Health Sys. Inc., No. 11 CV 58, 2013 WL 2553626 (M.D. Ga. May 15, 2013); F.T.C. v. OSF Healthcare Sys., 852 F. Supp. 2d 1069 (N.D. Ill. 2012); F.T.C. v. ProMedica Health Sys., Inc., No. 11 CV 47, 2011 WL 1219281 (N.D. Ohio Mar. 29, 2011).

2 Private parties and the Idaho Attorney General also sued.

3 HHIs are often used to evaluate market concentration and are "calculated by summing the squares of the individual firms' market shares."

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions