United States v. Cargill Meat Solutions Corp., et al.; Proposed Final Judgments and Competitive Impact Statement

Document Headings Document headings vary by document type but may contain the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document the number of the CFR title and the number of each part the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly related to the agency docket number / agency internal file number the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions See the Document Drafting Handbook for more details. Department of Justice Antitrust Division Notice is hereby given pursuant to the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 U.S.C. 16(b)-(h) , that proposed Final Judgments, Stipulations, and a Competitive Impact Statement have been filed with the United States District Court for the District of Maryland in United States of America v. Cargill Meat Solutions Corp., et al., Civil Action No. 1:22-cv-01821. On July 25, 2022, the United States filed a Complaint alleging that three poultry processors (Cargill, Sanderson Farms, and Wayne Farms), as part of a conspiracy with other poultry processors that together employ more than 90 percent of all poultry processing plant workers in the United States, conspired to collaborate with and assist their competitors in making decisions about worker compensation, including wages and benefits, and to exchange information about current and future compensation plans for their processing plant workers, in violation of section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. 1 . The Complaint also alleges that data consultants, including WMS & Co. and its CEO, G. Jonathan Meng, facilitated the processors' collaboration and compensation information exchanges, in violation of section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. 1 . The proposed Final Judgments, filed at the same time as the Complaint, require Cargill, Sanderson Farms, Wayne Farms, WMS, and Meng to cease their information-sharing and facilitation of such conduct. In addition, the settling defendants are prohi…