United States: The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2017: Cartels

The United States Department of Justice's Antitrust Division has continued to vigorously pursue criminal cartel activity and to successfully bring to justice those who commit these crimes. The past year has demonstrated the Division's unrelenting resolve to hold corporate and individual offenders accountable, to prosecute foreign offenders, and to secure severe consequences to deter future violations.

This annual update begins with an enforcement data overview, and is followed by a summary of notable policy and case developments related to cartel enforcement over the previous year.

Enforcement Data

The Antitrust Division's commitment to prosecuting corporate cartel participants continued through fiscal year (FY) 2015, which saw charges brought against 20 corporate offenders in key sectors of the economy.1 The trend toward higher corporate fines shows no signs of declining with FY 2015 bringing in more than US$3.6 billion in criminal fines and penalties, representing the highest annual yield ever in the Division's history and the fourth year in a row exceeding US$1 billion." The Division's message is clear that offenders will be held criminally responsible and that no company is too small or too big to be charged.

Over the past year, the Division has also made individual accountability a critical component of its enforcement efforts, and it continues to insist on jail sentences with increasing frequency and for longer periods of time. The Division charged 66 individuals in FY 2015 – up from 44 in the previous year. The average number of individuals sentenced to prison increased 85 per cent from 2006 to 2015,3 and the average prison term for criminal antitrust violations is now 24 months, representing an increase of 65 per cent over the preceding decade.4

In its pursuit of those who engage in criminal conduct, the Division is readily prepared to litigate and 'will not be deterred from holding those involved – both corporations and individuals – accountable for their actions, and [it] welcome[s] the opportunity to prove [its] cases to a jury.'5

The Division's zeal also extends to foreign offenders whose schemes harm American consumers and who attempt to evade the jurisdiction of US courts. In March 2016, Assistant Attorney General William J Baer highlighted that the Division will hold offenders responsible regardless of where they reside or are nationals and will continue to seek extradition where appropriate.6 In the same month, a Canadian national – who was extradited in 2014 after spending five years contesting extradition to the United States – was convicted following a three-week trial in New Jersey.7

Recent policy developments

Enforcement against individuals remains a high priority

In September 2015, Deputy Attorney General Sally Q Yates directed the Department of Justice to focus on individual culpability in corporate investigations and to 'proactively investigat[e] individuals at every step of the process – before, during and after any corporate cooperation.'8 The memorandum underscores that 'the most effective ways to combat corporate misconduct is by seeking accountability from the individuals who perpetrated the wrongdoing.'9

The Antitrust Division is taking the policy memorandum seriously and has already taken steps to incorporate the directive into its enforcement approach. In February 2016, Brent Snyder, the Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Criminal Enforcement, indicated that the Division has adopted internal procedures 'to ensure that each of [its] criminal offices systematically identifies all potentially culpable individuals as early in the investigative process as feasible and that [it] bring[s] cases against individuals' as quickly as possible.10 He emphasised that the Division is 'committed to holding accountable the highest-level culpable executives at conspirator companies' and, to this end, has adopted a novel method of reviewing corporate defendants' organisational structures 'to ensure that [it is] identifying and investigating all senior executives who potentially condoned, directed, or participated in the criminal conduct.'11

Director of Criminal Enforcement Marvin Price indicated in June 2016 that pursuing culpable individuals is a 'number one priority' for the Division and that it considers prison sentences to be the best deterrent.12

Credit for corporate compliance programmes

In recent years, the Antitrust Division has shown signs of a potential shift in policy towards recommending reductions at the sentencing phase to take into consideration compliance programmes. It awarded credit against criminal fines to two companies in 2015, recognising their efforts to implement or improve compliance programmes: Barclays PLC became the first company to receive credit in May in connection with the Division's investigation into the foreign exchange (FX) spot market, and Kayaba Industry Co Ltd (KYB Corporation) received credit in October in connection with the Division's long-running auto parts investigation.13

A recent survey suggests that almost one-third of US corporations have now introduced proactive compliance programmes.14 The Division has been clear, however, that it will only credit such programmes where they are meaningful and effective. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Snyder explained last fall that the Division will not credit 'backward-looking' or pre-existing compliance efforts that failed to deter and detect cartel behaviour, or compliance programmes put into place or nominally improved after a company comes under investigation. Compliance efforts must go further to reflect 'genuine efforts to change a company's culture,' he said.15 The Division announced in November 2015 that it had hired an expert to assist in evaluating the validity and sufficiency of companies' compliance programmes in criminal matters.16

The Criminal Antitrust Anti-Retaliation Act

In July 2015, the US Senate unanimously passed the Criminal Antitrust Anti-Retaliation Act (CAARA) as an amendment to the Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004. The amendment is meant to provide antitrust whistleblowers protections similar to those found in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The CAARA safeguards from retaliation by an employer any employee, contractor, subcontractor or agent who provides or causes to be provided to the employer or the federal government information about any violation of antitrust laws.17

Recent case developments

Auto parts

The Antitrust Division's largest-ever criminal investigation is in its seventh year and still underway. To date, a total of 64 individuals and 44 companies have been charged and have agreed to pay more than US$2.7 billion in criminal fines in connection with a series of far-reaching price-fixing, bid-rigging and market allocation conspiracies in the automotive industry.18 The schemes are alleged to have stretched for over two decades across several continents, and implicated many different products and culpable parties.

Most recently, in June 2016, a federal grand jury returned two indictments charging Japanese automotive parts companies and their US subsidiaries – the first companies to be indicted – as well as a total of five executives.19 Earlier in the year, Corning International Kabushiki Kaisha and KYB Corporation agreed to plead guilty and pay US$66.5 million and US$62 million in criminal fines, respectively.20 KYB Corporation has also agreed to cooperate with the ongoing investigation, which encompasses a collaboration of enforcement efforts across various agencies in the United States and abroad.


As part of the President's Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force (FFETF), which also involves a cooperation effort among a number of law enforcement agencies, the Antitrust Division continues its investigation into London InterBank Offered Rate (LIBOR) manipulation schemes.

In November 2015, after a month-long trial, two former London-based Coöperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen-Boerenleenbank BA (Rabobank) traders were convicted for their roles in manipulating LIBOR, a global benchmark interest rate for many financial products.21 They were sentenced in March 2016 to 24 months, and 12 months and one day in prison, which were the first two sentences handed down in the United States for rate manipulation.22

In May 2016, a federal grand jury returned a 10-count indictment against two former Deutsche Bank AG traders for their participation in LIBOR manipulation to gain an illegal advantage in the market.23

The Division's investigation has included prior resolutions with six banks, including Rabobank and Deutsche Bank, as well as Barclays Bank PLC, UBS AG, The Royal Bank of Scotland plc and Lloyds Banking Group plc. Thirteen individuals have also been charged: two have been convicted, three have pleaded guilty, and charges against the others are pending.24

In addition, in May 2016, the Second Circuit reversed a lower court's dismissal of civil antitrust class action claims against 16 banks. The Second Circuit held that plaintiffs adequately alleged antitrust injury based on the alleged manipulation of US dollar LIBOR, on the grounds that the alleged horizontal price-fixing constituted a per se federal antitrust violation.25 Nine of the 16 defendant banks have already settled or are in the process of settling, with a total value of settlements to date exceeding US$2 billion.26


In June 2016, Hitachi Chemical Co Ltd pleaded guilty to a criminal antitrust charge for conspiring with competitors for more than a decade to fix prices for electrolytic capacitors, a critical component in a broad array of electronic products. The District Court judge sentenced Hitachi to five years' corporate probation (which is two years more than the three-year probationary period that the Antitrust Division sought) and a US$3.8 million fine.27 Earlier in the year, in January 2016, NEC TOKIN Corp pleaded guilty to participating in the same conspiracy and was fined US$13.8 million.28 Hitachi and NEC TOKIN's pleas represent the first and second pleas in this investigation.

Public real estate foreclosure auctions

In a joint effort with the FBI as part of the FFETF, the Antitrust Division is continuing its investigation into bid-rigging at public real estate foreclosure auctions in four different states. Since early 2015, 15 individuals have been charged for their participation in this scheme, which sought to cash in on the financial crisis by defrauding financial institutions and homeowners.29 More than 100 individuals have been charged since the investigation began;30 51 of them have already pleaded guilty and 22 have been indicted.31 Twenty-one individuals have hearings scheduled by the end of this year and the first trial in the case is set to commence in September.32

Deputy Assistant Attorney General Snyder recently defended the Division's prosecution of a large number of these relatively minor cases, which have been accused of tying up limited government resources. 'We do view it as an important investigation,' he said, 'We wouldn't be putting the resources into it that we are if it weren't.'33 He underscored the Division's commitment to pursuing local and regional investigations, in addition to more extensive national and international ones.34

Ocean shipping

Three shipping executives were indicted in October 201535 and a fourth was indicted in June 201636 in connection with the Antitrust Division's ongoing investigation into a decade-long conspiracy to fix prices for shipping services for 'roll-on, roll-off cargo,' such as cars, trucks and equipment. The co-conspirators are accused of colluding to fix prices, allocate markets and routes, and not bid against each other in the provision of ocean shipping services. Eight executives have been charged to date; four have already pleaded guilty and been sentenced to prison, and charges remain pending against the others. A Chilean company and two Japanese companies have also previously pleaded guilty and have paid over US$136 million in criminal fines.37

Online wall décor

In December 2015, one individual and his company were indicted in connection with an ongoing investigation following searches of the individual's residence and the corporation's headquarters by UK law enforcement and the FBI.38 Another individual, a former executive of an online seller of wall décor, had agreed to plead guilty last year for his participation in the scheme, which involved price-fixing of certain posters sold online through Amazon Marketplace and which represented the first-ever criminal prosecution against conduct that specifically targeted e-commerce.39

Environmental services

A Canadian national and the former CEO of Bennett Environmental Inc, a company that specialises in the treatment and disposal of contaminated soil, was convicted following a three-week trial in March 2016. He had previously been extradited in 2014 from Canada to the United States in connection with a conspiracy to pay kickbacks and corrupt the procurement process at an Environmental Protection Agency Superfund site. The scheme had caused more than US$1 million in kickbacks to be paid. The Antitrust Division's ongoing investigation has so far resulted in 10 individuals and three companies pleading guilty or being convicted, and paying more than US$6 million in criminal fines and restitution.40

Parking heaters

In an ongoing investigation, three German executives of Espar Inc were indicted in December 2015 for alleged price-fixing of parking heaters used in commercial vehicles and sold in the aftermarket. Espar Inc also pleaded guilty last year and was sentenced to pay a US$14.9 million criminal fine.41

Water treatment chemicals

GEO Specialty Chemicals Inc pleaded guilty in June 2016 for its role in a decade-long conspiracy to fix prices, rig bids and allocate customers for liquid aluminum sulfate, a substance used by municipalities and pulp and paper manufacturers for water treatment and manufacturing processes. GEO was the first corporate defendant to be charged in this ongoing investigation and was sentenced to a US$5 million fine.42 One individual previously pleaded guilty in October 201543 and two others were indicted in February 2016.44

Small business construction contracts

In February 2016, MCC Construction Company pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit fraud and agreed to pay nearly US$1.8 million in criminal penalties and forfeiture. It had conspired with two other companies to illegally perform work under government contracts that were set aside for small businesses. During a three-year period, MCC won contracts totalling more than US$70 million.45 A former officer and owner of MCC pleaded guilty in June 2016 to conspiring to obstruct justice and agreed to pay US$165,711 in restitution.46

Heir location services

In June 2016, Brandenburger & Davis and its former president and CEO pleaded guilty to conspiring for nearly a decade to fix prices and allocate customers for heir location services. These represent the first prosecutions in this industry in Antitrust Division history. Brandenburger & Davis also agreed to plead guilty and pay a US$890,000 criminal fine, and both the individual and the company have agreed to assist with the Division's ongoing investigation.47 In January 2016, the owner and president of another heir-location services provider also agreed to plead guilty for his participation in a similar scheme and to provide assistance with the investigation.48

Tax lien auctions

In an ongoing investigation between the Antitrust Division and the FBI as part of the FFETF, a former bidder for a tax lien investment company was sentenced in March 2016 to serve a term of 12 months and one day in prison and to pay a criminal fine of US$25,000. He had been convicted in October 2015 following a multi-week trial in connection with a conspiracy to allocate and rig bids at municipal tax liens auctions. To date, a total of 13 individuals and three companies have been convicted or pleaded guilty in connection with this investigation.49

Colour display tubes

In November 2015, a former executive of a Taiwan-based company became the first individual to plead guilty to a global conspiracy to fix prices in an ongoing investigation relating to color display tubes, which are used in computer monitors and other specialised applications. Samsung SDI Company Ltd had previously pleaded guilty in 2011 and paid a US$32 million fine and four other individuals have been indicted.50

Other cases

The Antitrust Division continues to vigorously pursue efforts to hold offenders criminally responsible for collusive conduct in a number of other investigations that have not had significant public developments over the past 12 months, including the foreign currency exchange (FX) market investigation, which involves a conspiracy to manipulate key FX benchmarks, and the ISDAfix investigation which involves an alleged conspiracy to manipulate ISDAfix. Four major banks pleaded guilty in 2015 and another agreed to plead guilty to manipulating LIBOR and other benchmark rates. None of the plea agreements prevent the Department of Justice from prosecuting individuals for related misconduct. The Justice Department is also investigating bid-rigging in the market for US government debt (Treasuries investigation).

The Division also recently announced that it expects to reveal new criminal investigations by the end of 2016.51


The past year's developments signal the Antitrust Division's continued focus on cartel enforcement with increasing corporate fines and lengthier prison sentences. The Division has levied charges against a number of individual offenders over the past year, ostensibly pursuant to a more aggressive policy to hold culpable executives accountable. In this environment of heightened risk for antitrust liability, and in light of the Division's recent willingness to credit companies for their compliance efforts, effective antitrust compliance programmes are now more important than ever.

Originally published in the "United States: Cartels" chapter of Global Competition Review's The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2017.


1 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Criminal Enforcement Trends Charts,' (11 December 2015), available at https://www.justice.gov/atr/criminal-enforcement-fine-and-jail-charts.2 Id.

3 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Assistant Attorney General Bill Baer of the Antitrust Division Testifies Before Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights,' (9 March 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/assistant-attorney-general-bill-baer-antitrust-division-testifies-senate-judiciary.

4 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Criminal Enforcement Trends Charts,' (11 December 2015), available at https://www.justice.gov/atr/criminal-enforcement-fine-and-jail-charts.

5 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Two Japanese Auto Parts Companies, U.S. Subsidiaries, and Five Executives Indicted for Rigging Automotive Parts Bids,' (15 June 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/two-japanese-auto-parts-companies-us-subsidiaries-and-five-executives-indicted-rigging.

6 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Assistant Attorney General Bill Baer of the Antitrust Division Testifies Before Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights,' (9 March 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/assistant-attorney-general-bill-baer-antitrust-division-testifies-senate-judiciary.

7 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Former CEO of Canadian Hazardous Waste Treatment Company Convicted of Conspiracy to Pay Kickbacks and Committing Major Fraud against the United States,' (16 March 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-ceo-canadian-hazardous-waste-treatment-company-convicted-conspiracy-pay-kickbacks-and.

8 Memorandum from Sally Quillian Yates, Deputy Att'y Gen., U.S. Dep't of Justice, to Assistant Att'y Gen, Antitrust Div., U.S. Dep't of Justice et al., regarding Individual Accountability for Corporate Wrongdoing (9 September 2015), available at https://www.justice.gov/dag/file/769036/download.

9 Id.

10 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brent Snyder Delivers Remarks at the Yale Global Antitrust Enforcement Conference,' (19 February 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/deputy-assistant-attorney-general-brent-snyder-delivers-remarks-yale-global-antitrust.

11 Id.

12 Trade Regulation Reporter – Report Letter, 1466, Trade Regulation Reports.

13 Leah Nylen, 'Car Parts Maker KYB Becomes Second Company to Gain Compliance Credit in Antitrust Case,' Mlex (29 September 2015), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=723322&siteid=191&rdir=1.

14 14

15 MLex Market Insight, Report from the 64th ABA Antitrust Law Spring Meeting, 'US companies eager for more compliance-program guidance' (2016) at p. 71, available at http://mlexmarketinsight.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/MLex-ABA_Coverage_Spring_2016-LR-Updated-Version.pdf.

16 15 Id.

17 16

18 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell Speaks at SIFMA Compliance and Legal Society New York Regional Seminar,' (2 November 2015), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/assistant-attorney-general-leslie-r-caldwell-speaks-sifma-compliance-and-legal-society.

19 Criminal Antitrust Anti-Retaliation Act, S. 1599, 114th Cong. (2015).

20 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Two Japanese Auto Parts Companies, U.S. Subsidiaries, and Five Executives Indicted for Rigging Automotive Parts Bids,' (15 June 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/two-japanese-auto-parts-companies-us-subsidiaries-and-five-executives-indicted-rigging.

21 Id.

22 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Corning International Kabushiki Kaisha to Pay $66.5 Million for Fixing Prices of Automotive Parts,' (16 May 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/corning-international-kabushiki-kaisha-pay-665-million-fixing-prices-automotive-parts; 'KYB Agrees to Plead Guilty and Pay $62 Million Criminal Fine for Fixing Price of Shock Absorbers,' (16 September 2015), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/kyb-agrees-plead-guilty-and-pay-62-million-criminal-fine-fixing-price-shock-absorbers.

23 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Two Former Rabobank Traders Convicted for Manipulating U.S. Dollar, Yen LIBOR Interest Rates,' (5 November 2015), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/two-former-rabobank-traders-convicted-manipulating-us-dollar-yen-libor-interest-rates.

24 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Two Former Rabobank Traders Sentenced to Prison for Manipulating U.S. Dollar and Japanese Yen LIBOR Interest Rates,' (10 March 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/two-former-rabobank-traders-sentenced-prison-manipulating-us-dollar-and-japanese-yen-libor.

25 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Two Former Deutsche Bank Employees Indicted on Fraud Charges in Connection with Long-Running Manipulation of Libor,' (2 June 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/two-former-deutsche-bank-employees-indicted-fraud-charges-connection-long-running.

26 Id.

27 In re: LIBOR-Based Financial Instruments Antitrust Litig., No. 13-3565 (2d Cir. 2016).

28 See In re Foreign Exch. Benchmark Rates Antitrust Litig., No. 1:13-cv-07789-LGS, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175877 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 15, 2015).

29 Joshua Sisco, 'Judge boosts Hitachi probation from three to five years, approves $3.8 million fine,' Mlex (9 June 2016), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=802591&siteid=191&rdir=1.

30 See U.S. v. NEC TOKIN Corp., Plea Agreement (filed 5 January 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/atr/file/844121/download.

31 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Division Update Spring 2016: Prosecuting Collusion and Fraud at Real Estate Foreclosure Auctions' (8 April 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/atr/division-operations/division-update-2016/real-estate-foreclosure-auctions.

32 Id.

33 Kathryn Leger, 'DoJ has new criminal antitrust investigations on horizon, official says – ABA California panel,' PaRR (1 July 2016), available at https://app.parr-global.com/intelligence/view/1418892?src_alert_id=135806.

34 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Upcoming Hearings in Pending Cases,' available at https://www.justice.gov/atr/upcoming-public-hearings-pending-cases#chang.

35 Richard Vanderford, 'DOJ official defends use of resources on foreclosure cases,' MLex (20 May 2015), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=783525&siteid=191&rdir=1.

36 Id.

37 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Three Ocean Shipping Executives Indicted for Fixing Prices and Rigging Bids,' (6 October 2015), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/three-ocean-shipping-executives-indicted-fixing-prices-and-rigging-bids.

38 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Fourth Ocean Shipping Executive Indicted for Price Fixing and Bid Rigging,' (7 June 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/fourth-ocean-shipping-executive-indicted-price-fixing-and-bid-rigging.

39 Id.

40 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'E-Commerce Exec and Online Retailer Charged with Price Fixing Wall Posters,' (4 December 2015), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/e-commerce-exec-and-online-retailer-charged-price-fixing-wall-posters.

41 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Former E-Commerce Executive Charged with Price Fixing in the Antitrust Division's First Online Marketplace Prosecution,' (6 April 2015), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-e-commerce-executive-charged-price-fixing-antitrust-divisions-first-online-marketplace.

42 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Former CEO of Canadian Hazardous Waste Treatment Company Convicted of Conspiracy to Pay Kickbacks and Committing Major Fraud against the United States,' (16 March 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-ceo-canadian-hazardous-waste-treatment-company-convicted-conspiracy-pay-kickbacks-and.

43 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Three German Executives Indicted for Participation in Parking Heater Price-Fixing Scheme,' (9 December 2015), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/three-german-executives-indicted-participation-parking-heater-price-fixing-scheme.

44 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Water Treatment Chemicals Manufacturer Pleads Guilty in Conspiracy Aimed at Eliminating Competition,' (16 June 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/water-treatment-chemicals-manufacturer-pleads-guilty-conspiracy-aimed-eliminating-competition.

45 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Former Executive Admits Guilt in Conspiracy Affecting Water Treatment Chemicals,' (27 October 2015), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-executive-admits-guilt-conspiracy-affecting-water-treatment-chemicals.

46 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Two Executives Charged for Conspiring to Eliminate Competition to Supply Water Treatment Chemicals,' (19 February 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/two-executives-charged-conspiring-eliminate-competition-supply-water-treatment-chemicals.

47 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'MCC Construction Company Agrees to Pay Nearly $1.8 Million for Conspiring to Illegally Obtain Federal Contracts Meant for Small, Disadvantaged Businesses,' (2 February 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/mcc-construction-company-agrees-pay-nearly-18-million-conspiring-illegally-obtain-federal.

48 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Former MCC Construction Company Officer and Owner Pleads Guilty to Conspiring to Obstruct Government Proceeding,' (22 June 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-mcc-construction-company-officer-and-owner-pleads-guilty-conspiring-obstruct.

49 Joshua Sisco, 'Heir locator company, employee plead guilty to customer allocation,' MLex (16 June 2016), available at www.mlex.com/GlobalAntitrust/DetailView.aspx?cid=804437&siteid=191&rdir=1.

50 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'President of Heir Location Services Provider to Plead Guilty for Agreement Not to Compete,' (14 January 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/president-heir-location-services-provider-plead-guilty-agreement-not-compete.

51 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Judge Orders New Jersey Investor to Serve a Year in Prison for Bid Rigging at Tax Lien Auctions,' (29 March 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/judge-orders-new-jersey-investor-serve-year-prison-bid-rigging-tax-lien-auctions.

52 U.S. Dep't of Justice, 'Former Sales Executive Pleads Guilty to Participation in Color Display Tube Conspiracy,' (18 November 2015), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-sales-executive-pleads-guilty-participation-color-display-tube-conspiracy.

53 Kathryn Leger, 'DoJ has new criminal antitrust investigations on horizon, official says – ABA California panel,' PaRR (1 July 2016), available at https://app.parr-global.com/intelligence/view/1418892?src_alert_id=135806.

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
Shearman & Sterling LLP
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Shearman & Sterling LLP
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