In a significant legal move, a Missouri-based company has filed a lawsuit against a major chemical corporation, alleging anticompetitive practices that have stifled competition and harmed consumers. Rightline, LLC filed the complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on June 21, 2024, targeting FMC Corporation.
Rightline accuses FMC of implementing an illegal loyalty program to maintain its monopoly over sulfentrazone, a broad-spectrum herbicide. According to the complaint, FMC's loyalty program rewarded large national distributors for purchasing one hundred percent of their sulfentrazone from FMC, effectively blocking generic competitors from entering the market. "FMC’s illegal plan took the form of a sulfentrazone distributor loyalty program implemented at the large national distributors which awarded the distributors for making one hundred percent of their purchases of sulfentrazone from FMC," states Rightline in its filing.
The lawsuit highlights that this loyalty program has been successful in keeping generic versions of sulfentrazone out of the primary distribution channels, which account for over eighty percent of the marketplace. This has resulted in higher prices for end-use consumers who had limited access to more affordable generic alternatives. Rightline argues that similar loyalty programs involving agricultural herbicides and pesticides have faced legal challenges from various entities including the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and multiple state attorneys general.
Rightline claims it has lost millions in sales and profits due to FMC's monopolistic practices. The plaintiff seeks compensation for past damages as well as a permanent injunction to stop FMC's continued illegal activities. "Rightline seeks compensation for past damages from FMC as well as a permanent injunction enjoining FMC’s continued illegal activities," reads the complaint.
The case also delves into industry-specific details about sulfentrazone, explaining its attributes such as rapid effectiveness and residual strength in soil. Despite its patent expiring in 2006, allowing other manufacturers to produce generic versions, Rightline alleges that none have made significant market inroads due to FMC's anticompetitive tactics.
In addition to financial damages, Rightline is asking for treble damages under both the Sherman Act and Clayton Act. They are also seeking attorneys' fees and costs associated with bringing this lawsuit forward. "Rightline prays for damages, trebled, attorneys’ fees, costs, and any other such relief as supported by the law and evidence," concludes their plea.
Representing Rightline are Richard A. Barkasy from Whiteford Taylor & Preston L.L.C., along with William F. Ryan Jr., Steven E. Tiller, and Patrick D. Houston who will be appearing pro hac vice. The case is presided over by Judge KNS under Case ID 2:24-cv-02726-KNS.