Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 1 of 96
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`MIAMI DIVISION
`
`IN RE: FARM-RAISED SALMON AND
`SALMON PRODUCTS ANTITRUST
`LITIGATION
`
`Master File No. 19-21551-CV-
`ALTONAGA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`THIRD CONSOLIDATED AMENDED
`DIRECT PURCHASER CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 2 of 96
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................. I
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`III.
`
`IV.
`
`V.
`
`VI.
`
`NATURE OF ACTION ............................................................................................... 1
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE .................................................................................. 4
`
`PLAINTIFFS ............................................................................................................... 5
`
`DEFENDANTS ........................................................................................................... 6
`
`AGENTS AND CO-CONSPIRATORS .................................................................... 25
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS .................................................................................... 26
`
`A. The European Commission And The United States Department Of Justice Are
`Investigating Unexplained Price Increases In The Salmon Market. ......................... 26
`
`B. The Influence Of Spot Prices In The Salmon Market Makes It Susceptible To
`Collusion And Defendants Were Well-Aware Of This Opportunity. ....................... 32
`
`C. Defendants Were In Constant Communication And Were Dedicated To Cooperation,
`Particularly After Russia Ceased Importing Norwegian Salmon. ............................. 39
`
`D. Defendants’ Direct Communications Have To Be Viewed In The Context Of the
`Culture of Cooperation Fostered Within The Norwegian Salmon Industry. ............ 47
`
`E. During The Class Period, Defendants Have Engaged In Closely Parallel Pricing
`Behavior That Has Resulted In Record Profitability. ................................................ 53
`
`F. Defendants’ Pricing Behavior Is Not Justified By Cost Factors. .............................. 59
`
`G. The Structure And Characteristics Of The Market For Salmon Support The
`Existence Of A Collusive Restraint. .......................................................................... 62
`
`1. Industry Concentration Facilitates Collusion. ............................................. 63
`
`2. Barriers To New Entry Are High. ................................................................ 66
`
`3. Farm-Raised Salmon Is A Commodity Product And Prices Are Correlated
`Across The Globe. ....................................................................................... 69
`
`4. Norwegian Companies Dominate The Production Of Farm-Raised Salmon
`And The Defendants Are The Largest Global Producers. ........................... 72
`
`i
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 3 of 96
`
`5. Farmed Salmon Production Is Highly Inelastic And The Product Is
`Perishable. .................................................................................................... 73
`
`H. The Alleged Conspiracy Adversely Affected Direct Purchasers In The United States,
`Which Is A Substantial Market For Salmon. ............................................................ 74
`
`VII.
`
`TOLLING OF THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ............................................... 78
`
`VIII.
`
`CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS .......................................................................... 80
`
`IX.
`
`X.
`
`XI.
`
`INTERSTATE TRADE AND COMMERCE ........................................................... 82
`
`PLAINTIFFS AND THE CLASS SUFFERED ANTITRUST INJURY ................. 82
`
`CAUSES OF ACTION ............................................................................................. 83
`
`XII.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF ............................................................................................ 89
`
`ii
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 4 of 96
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiffs Euclid Fish Company; Euro USA Inc.; Schneider’s Fish and Sea Food
`
`Corporation; and The Fishing Line LLC(collectively, “Plaintiffs”), individually and on behalf of
`
`all others similarly situated (the “Class,” as defined below), file this Third Consolidated Amended
`
`Complaint (“TCAC”) pursuant to this Court’s order of March 24, 2021 (ECF No. 242), against
`
`Defendants Mowi ASA (formerly known as Marine Harvest ASA), Mowi USA, LLC (formerly
`
`known as Marine Harvest USA, LLC), Marine Harvest Canada, Inc., and Mowi Ducktrap, LLC
`
`(formerly known as Ducktrap River of Maine LLC) (collectively, “Mowi” or “Marine Harvest”);
`
`Grieg Seafood ASA, Grieg Seafood BC Ltd., Ocean Quality AS (now known as Sjor AS)
`
`(collectively, “Grieg”); Ocean Quality North America Inc., Ocean Quality USA Inc., and Ocean
`
`Quality Premium Brands, Inc. (collectively, “Ocean Quality”); SalMar ASA (“SalMar”); Lerøy
`
`Seafood AS and Lerøy Seafood USA Inc. (collectively, “Lerøy”); and Cermaq Group AS, Cermaq
`
`US LLC, Cermaq Canada Ltd., and Cermaq Norway AS (collectively, “Cermaq”); and entities
`
`owned or controlled by them (collectively, “Defendants”).
`
`2.
`
`In the TCAC, which supersedes the prior Second Consolidated Amended
`
`Complaint (“SCAC”), Plaintiffs bring an action for damages, injunctive relief, and any other relief
`
`pursuant to the federal antitrust laws. The allegations in the TCAC are based on Plaintiffs’ personal
`
`knowledge as to the facts pertaining to themselves and upon information and belief as to all other
`
`matters, including the investigation of counsel and review of documents that Defendants produced
`
`to the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the European
`
`Commission (“EC”) in connection with this litigation pursuant to this Court’s orders of April 6
`
`and June 3, 2020 (ECF Nos. 207, 233). Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all matters so triable.
`
`I.
`
`NATURE OF ACTION
`
`3.
`
`This lawsuit alleges that Mowi, Lerøy, SalMar, Ocean Quality/Grieg, and Cermaq
`
`unlawfully coordinated prices charged to direct purchasers of farm-raised Atlantic salmon1 (Salmo
`
`1
`
`As used herein, unless otherwise indicated, the term “salmon” refers to “Atlantic
`salmon.” As further explained below, “Atlantic salmon” can be farmed not only in locations that
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 5 of 96
`
`salar) and salmon products derived therefrom, which Defendants directly sold to Plaintiffs and the
`
`class between April 10, 2013 and the present, in violation of Sections 1 and 3 of the Sherman Act
`
`(15 U.S.C. §§ 1, 3), which prohibit all forms of contracts, combinations, or conspiracies that, in
`
`any manner, tend to restrain trade by fixing, raising, or stabilizing the prices at which goods or
`
`services are sold to customers in the United States.
`
`4.
`
`The suit parallels antitrust investigations by the EC and the DOJ. The EC
`
`confirmed “that on 19 February 2019 its officials carried out unannounced inspections in several
`
`Member States at the premises of several companies in the sector of farmed Atlantic salmon.”
`
`5.
`
`The EC commenced its investigation by sending a letter in early February 2019 to
`
`the world’s dominant suppliers of farm-raised salmon and their affiliates, in which it explained
`
`that it had received information that Defendants are “participat[ing in] or have participated in anti-
`
`competitive agreements and/or concerted practices related to different ways of price coordination
`
`in order to sustain and possibly increase the prices for Norwegian salmon.” Though Cermaq was
`
`not included in the EC’s raids, Cermaq has no offices in the EU and is not subject to the EC’s
`
`regulatory oversight.
`
`6.
`
`The DOJ also issued criminal subpoenas on November 15, 2019 (after Plaintiffs
`
`filed the CAC) to Mowi, SalMar, and Grieg entities in connection with its own antitrust
`
`investigation into price-fixing in the Atlantic salmon market; according to press reports, “[t]he
`
`companies said that the probe was about previously announced European Commission inspection
`
`on possible collusion between Norwegian producers of farmed Norwegian Atlantic salmon and
`
`class action complaints in the United States.” At the same time, Lerøy Seafood AS issued an
`
`announcement indicating that its United States subsidiary, Lerøy Seafood USA Inc., had also
`
`received a similar subpoena from the DOJ.
`
`7.
`
`As alleged in detail below, the Defendants, inter alia, have been engaging in the
`
`following misconduct:
`
`border the Atlantic Ocean (e.g., Norway and Scotland), but also in certain locations that border the
`Pacific Ocean (primarily in Canada and Chile).
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 6 of 96
`
`•
`
`•
`
`Applying a coordinated strategy to fix, raise, or stabilize spot
`prices
`of
`farmed Norwegian
`salmon
`through
`inter-competitor transactions reported to the NASDAQ
`Salmon Index, which is used as the reference point by
`Defendants to set the prices of salmon and salmon products
`worldwide.
`
`Coordinating sales prices and exchanging commercially
`sensitive information through in-person meetings and
`telephonic and written communications in order to reduce
`competition between Defendants within the European Union
`for salmon, and thereby facilitating supra-competitive spot
`pricing reported by the Nasdaq Salmon Index.
`
`8.
`
`In the relevant period, Defendants collectively reduced price competition between
`
`them. One of the ways in which they did so was through the NASDAQ Salmon Index—a new
`
`price benchmarking service that was introduced in April of 2013—by buying and selling salmon
`
`from each other on the spot market2 in non-arm’s length transactions to prop up prices in the
`
`industry. In particular, Mowi used the subsidiary it purchased between 2012 and 2013—Morpol,
`
`the largest producer of smoked salmon—to purchase significant quantities of salmon from Mowi
`
`and the other Defendants on the spot market in the relevant period. The NASDAQ Salmon Index
`
`used these prices to calculate weekly “spot” prices published on NQSALMON, and these spot
`
`prices had a direct effect on the sales prices of salmon on transactions that use the spot price as a
`
`reference or benchmark price, including pricing to direct purchasers in the United States. See
`
`Appendix A (comparing Defendants’ pricing offered in the United States and NASDAQ Salmon
`
`Index prices on a weekly basis). The results were significant. Defendants achieved record
`
`profitability in 2013. Then, in August of 2014, Russia banned the importation of Norwegian
`
`salmon, a ban which continues today. But Defendants’ anticompetitive conduct allowed them to
`
`obtain supra-competitive profits and prices in 2014, despite what should have been significant
`
`downturn in prices and profitability caused by the ban and the loss of one of Defendants’ largest
`
`2 Spot markets are also referred to as cash markets or physical markets because assets are
`sold for cash and delivered immediately, as opposed to through longer term contracts.
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 7 of 96
`
`markets. In the following years, Defendants again reaped record revenues from skyrocketing
`
`prices caused by their anticompetitive conduct.
`
`9.
`
`Plaintiffs seek to represent a Class consisting of all persons and entities in the
`
`United States, its territories, and the District of Columbia who directly purchased farm-raised
`
`Atlantic salmon or products derived therefrom from one or more Defendants and/or entities owned
`
`or controlled by them from April 10, 2013 until the effects of the anticompetitive conduct alleged
`
`herein cease (the “Class Period”). Excluded from the Class are the Court and its personnel and
`
`any Defendants and their parent or subsidiary companies. This Class Period is based on newly
`
`obtained information from Defendants’ productions to regulators of which Plaintiffs were
`
`previously unaware.
`
`II.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`10.
`
`Plaintiffs bring this class action pursuant to Sections 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act
`
`(15 U.S.C. §§ 15, 26) to: (a) recover damages suffered by the Class and the costs of suit, including
`
`reasonable attorneys’ fees; (b) enjoin Defendants’ anticompetitive conduct; and (c) obtain any
`
`other relief afforded under the antitrust laws of the United States for Defendants’ violations of
`
`Sections 1 and 3 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 1, 3).
`
`11.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1337,
`
`and Sections 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 15(a), 26).
`
`12.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
`
`P. 4(k) and 15 U.S.C. § 22, which states that “[a]ny suit, action, or proceeding under the antitrust
`
`laws against a corporation may be brought not only in the judicial district whereof it is an
`
`inhabitant, but also in any district wherein it may be found or transacts business; and all process
`
`in such cases may be served in the district of which it is an inhabitant, or wherever it may be
`
`found.”
`
`13.
`
`The Court further has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants based on, inter alia,
`
`their residency or transaction of business in the State of Florida; their purposeful actions in placing
`
`price-fixed salmon and products derived therefrom into the stream of commerce seeking to serve
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 8 of 96
`
`Florida (into which collectively tens of millions of kilograms of Norwegian, Scottish and Chilean
`
`salmon have been shipped during the Class period); Defendants’ purposeful availment of the
`
`benefits and protections of the laws of the State of Florida; Defendants’ commission of tortious
`
`acts within the State of Florida; Defendants’ United States subsidiaries’ purposeful activities
`
`within the State of Florida that are imputable to parent-entity Defendants located outside the
`
`United States; and/or the “conspiracy theory of jurisdiction” recognized by the Florida Supreme
`
`Court in Execu-Tech Business Sys., Inc. v. New Oji Paper Co., Ltd., 752 So. 2d 582 (2000). This
`
`Court also has jurisdiction over Defendants for claims arising under the Sherman and Clayton Acts
`
`based on their minimum contacts with the United States as a whole, and not simply through their
`
`contacts with the State of Florida. And this Court also has jurisdiction over the Mowi, SalMar,
`
`Grieg/Ocean Quality, and Lerøy Defendants because they declined to contest jurisdiction when
`
`filing a prior Rule 12 motion in this action.
`
`14.
`
`Venue is proper in this District pursuant to Sections 4, 12, and 16 of the Clayton
`
`Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 15, 22, and 26) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b), (c), and (d), because, at all times
`
`relevant to the Complaint, one or more of the Defendants resided, transacted business, was found,
`
`or had agents in this District.
`
`III.
`
`PLAINTIFFS
`
`15.
`
`Plaintiff Euclid Fish Company (“Euclid”) is an Ohio corporation that specializes in
`
`the distribution of fish and seafood to restaurants, specialty stores, country clubs, hotels, and
`
`casinos throughout the Midwest. Euclid is headquartered at 7839 Enterprise Drive, Mentor, Ohio
`
`44060. As a result of Defendants’ collusive and anticompetitive conduct, during the Class Period,
`
`Euclid purchased farm-raised salmon and/or products derived therefrom directly from one or more
`
`of the Defendants at artificially high or fixed prices and has suffered monetary losses as a result of
`
`the antitrust violations alleged herein.
`
`16.
`
`Plaintiff Euro USA Inc. (“Euro USA”) is an Ohio corporation that distributes fish
`
`and seafood, among other items. Euro USA is headquartered at 4481 Johnston Parkway,
`
`Cleveland, Ohio 44128. It has distribution offices in Sterling, Virginia and Chicago, Illinois. As
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 9 of 96
`
`a result of Defendants’ collusive and anticompetitive conduct, during the Class Period, Euro USA
`
`purchased farm-raised salmon and/or products derived therefrom directly from one or more of the
`
`Defendants at artificially high or fixed prices and has suffered monetary losses as a result of the
`
`antitrust violations alleged herein.
`
`17.
`
`Plaintiff Schneider’s Fish and Seafood Corp. (“Schneider’s”) is a New York
`
`corporation that specializes in the distribution of fish and seafood to restaurants, specialty stores,
`
`hotels, and other entities in the general area of Upstate and Western New York, headquartered at
`
`2150 Old Union Road, Cheektowaga, New York 14227. As a result of Defendants’ collusive and
`
`anticompetitive conduct, during the Class Period, Schneider’s purchased farm-raised salmon
`
`and/or products derived therefrom directly from one or more of the Defendants at artificially high
`
`or fixed prices and has suffered monetary losses as a result of the antitrust violations alleged herein.
`
`18.
`
`Plaintiff The Fishing Line LLC (“The Fishing Line”) is a New Jersey corporation
`
`that is a fresh fish market which supplies fish, including farm-raised salmon, to retailers and
`
`institutions throughout the United States. The Fishing Line is headquartered at 6774 Highway 9
`
`South, Howell, New Jersey 07731. As a result of Defendants’ collusive and anticompetitive
`
`conduct, during the Class Period, The Fishing Line purchased farm-raised salmon and/or products
`
`derived therefrom directly from one or more of the Defendants at artificially high or fixed prices
`
`and has suffered monetary losses as a result of the antitrust violations alleged herein.
`
`IV.
`
`DEFENDANTS
`
`19. Marine Harvest/Mowi Defendants. Defendant Mowi ASA (“Mowi ASA”) was
`
`formerly known as “Marine Harvest ASA” during most of the Class Period and is now known as
`
`“Mowi ASA.”
`
`20. Mowi ASA has long touted that it is a “global corporate brand” and the largest
`
`producer of Atlantic salmon. It is headquartered at Sandviksboder, 77AB, 5035, Bergen, Norway.
`
`Mowi ASA is listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange, where it is a constituent of the benchmark OBX
`
`Index.
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 10 of 96
`
`21. Mowi ASA is and advertises itself as a single unified global company. A recent
`
`example of this is its business strategy, unveiled in late 2018, of renaming itself from “Marine
`
`Harvest” to “Mowi,” which functions as a global brand for its products. Indeed, after Mowi ASA
`
`announced its name change, its wholly owned and controlled subsidiaries also changed their
`
`names. For example, Marine Harvest USA, LLC renamed itself as Mowi USA, LLC (“Mowi
`
`USA”) and Ducktrap River of Maine, LLC renamed itself as Mowi Ducktrap, LLC (“Mowi
`
`Ducktrap”).
`
`22. Mowi ASA is a global organization that operates through numerous subsidiaries
`
`and divisions in 25 countries, including the United States. Through its subsidiaries and divisions,
`
`Mowi ASA produces, processes, and sells salmon, the operations of which are focused in Norway,
`
`Scotland, Canada, the Faroe Islands, Ireland, and Chile. Mowi ASA has a share of between 25%
`
`and 30% of the global salmon and trout market, making it the world’s largest company in the
`
`sector. Mowi ASA also owns a “value added processing” operation, which prepares and
`
`distributes a range of seafood products, and a number of smaller divisions.
`
`23.
`
`Using its operations in the United States and other countries, Mowi ASA has sold
`
`its products to the United States as well as more than 70 different countries. Today, Mowi ASA’s
`
`website states that “[m]ore than 6 million Mowi meals are enjoyed around the world every day.”
`
`24.
`
`In December of 2012, Marine Harvest ASA acquired shares and a 48.5% stake in
`
`Morpol ASA (“Morpol”), which played a critical role in the conspiracy alleged herein. Marine
`
`Harvest ASA later acquired the majority of Morpol’s shares in March of 2013. The EC initially
`
`approved the acquisition, subject to certain divestitures. However, it later fined Mowi ASA 20
`
`million Euros for having exercised effective control over Morpol before the acquisition was
`
`approved. The European Court of Justice affirmed that decision in March of 2020. Mowi delisted
`
`Morpol from the Oslo Stock Exchange in November of 2013, cutting off the public’s insight into
`
`much of Morpol’s activity.
`
`25.
`
`Ola Brattvoll (“Bratvoll”), the Chief Operating Officer (“COO”) of Mowi ASA’s
`
`sales and marketing starting in January of 2014, took over as the Chairman of Morpol in 2012.
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 11 of 96
`
`Brattvoll had previously worked for Lerøy ASA, before following another former Lerøy executive,
`
`Alf-Helge Aarskog (“Aarskog”), Mowi ASA’s former Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), to Mowi
`
`ASA.
`
`26.
`
`According to an internal Morpol presentation, it is one of the world’s leading
`
`seafood companies and is the market leader in smoked seafood products—meaning it is a
`
`significant purchaser of salmon too. Mowi acknowledged that with Morpol, its combined
`
`operation is the “number 1 value added producer in Europe”—a fact that gave it considerable
`
`leverage over the market.
`
`27.
`
`As stated in a January 2014 Undercurrent News article, “[w]hen the world’s biggest
`
`buyer of salmon stops purchases from sources other than its parent Marine Harvest, it is going to
`
`impact prices.” The article describes how in a week where Morpol did not buy salmon on the spot
`
`market, prices fell. The converse is equally true. High spot prices paid by Morpol would and did
`
`cause overall spot prices to increase, which as alleged below was a mechanism Defendants used
`
`to inflate prices for salmon around the world, including in the United States.
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 12 of 96
`
`28. Marine Harvest’s internal documents also reflect that Morpol works in cooperation
`
`with Marine Harvest USA’s (later Mowi USA’s) office, as reflected in the following graphic:
`
`29. Mowi ASA has long held a unified global business strategy. Today, it promotes
`
`itself on its website and in its marketing materials as one “global fully integrated company”—
`
`“Mowi.” Instead of having separate websites for each wholly owned and controlled subsidiary,
`
`Mowi ASA integrates most of these subsidiaries within its main webpage under the “Contact us”
`
`tab. On that webpage, it represents all of these subsidiaries—including Mowi USA, Mowi Canada
`
`West, LLC, and Mowi Canada East, LLC—as one entity, stating that “Mowi is located in 25
`
`countries worldwide.” Mowi ASA’s American subsidiaries are intertwined with the parent entity,
`
`as evidenced by Mowi USA’s webpage that only identifies and provides contact information for
`
`three employees—one of whom is identified as the Sales Manager for Mowi Ducktrap. In
`
`advertising employment vacancies and new job opportunities within its company, Mowi ASA
`
`provides the public only one webpage, which is not divided by company (or subsidiary name).
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 13 of 96
`
`Instead, Mowi ASA consciously gives the impression that all job opportunities are within the larger
`
`“Mowi” conglomerate. The “Vacancies” webpage only identifies: (1) a brief job vacancy
`
`description; (2) the workplace (described as a destination, e.g., Fort William, Bruges); and (3) the
`
`application due date.
`
`30. Mowi ASA’s promotional materials note that Mowi employs 667 full time “[s]ales
`
`& [m]arketing” employees in “the Americas” alone, and that “[t]he [sales and marketing] division
`
`is organized geographically to support our worldwide client base.” Mowi ASA further explains
`
`that it has “significant new product development competence in [Mowi’s] central markets like the
`
`Americas.”
`
`31. Mowi ASA targets and transacts business in the United States, including Florida,
`
`through its wholly owned and wholly controlled subsidiary, Mowi USA, headquartered in Miami,
`
`Florida, formerly Marine Harvest USA. Mowi ASA ships salmon regularly to Mowi USA for the
`
`express purpose of transacting business within Florida and the United States. Mowi ASA is so
`
`intertwined with its United States subsidiary that Mowi USA does not even have its own website
`
`independent of Mowi ASA. Instead, as alleged above, Mowi USA is relegated to one short
`
`webpage within Mowi ASA’s larger website. Like the other subsidiaries identified on Mowi
`
`ASA’s website, Mowi USA is marketed and advertised on that website using Mowi ASA’s logo.
`
`Mowi USA’s registered trademarks “REBEL FISH” and “THE SALMON KITCHEN.COM” are
`
`marketed on Mowi ASA’s website as well. The public perception is such that media outlets
`
`continually describe Mowi in the United States and abroad as one interchangeable entity, referring,
`
`for example, to Mowi USA’s processing plants in the United States as belonging to Mowi. Mowi
`
`USA has also been described as the “US downstream division” of Mowi ASA.
`
`32.
`
`As stated on Mowi USA’s single webpage within Mowi ASA’s main website:
`
`“Everyday fresh fish is flown to Miami and Dallas where we package and ship it across the country.
`
`Our strategic plant locations enable us to ship fresh, never frozen fish anywhere in the US. Mowi
`
`USA is located in sunny Florida where salmon are flown in daily from Canada, Chile, Norway and
`
`other fish farms around the world.” Mowi ASA identifies high level employees as contacts in
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 14 of 96
`
`Miami, such as Robert Clark (Sales Director for Consumer Products) and Diana Dumet (Marketing
`
`Director).
`
`33.
`
`Describing its expansion into the United States’ seafood market, Mowi ASA
`
`explained that “[t]hrough our logistical network and well-situated facilities, we are able to reach
`
`the west coast, east coast[,] and central states within days, enabling us to provide fresh, healthy
`
`and delicious salmon and fish products to the entire US market.” Fulfilling the crucial role of
`
`targeting American consumers, Mowi ASA uses not only its factories in Florida, Maine, and
`
`Canada, but also its factory in Dallas, Texas, which opened in December of 2016 and replaced the
`
`role of its old factory in Los Angeles, California.
`
`34.
`
`As described in its annual report, Mowi ASA also launched a skin pack program of
`
`farmed Norwegian Atlantic Salmon in the United States with “a new nationwide retail partner . . .
`
`giving [Mowi] a new revenue stream.” According to at least one media site, the nationwide partner
`
`being referred to is Walmart, where Mowi ASA and Walmart’s partnership with the skin pack
`
`program dates back to mid-2015.
`
`35.
`
`Further targeting American consumers nationwide, Mowi ASA sells its farm-raised
`
`Atlantic salmon through Amazon’s website, something it has done from at least late 2017 through
`
`the present.
`
`36. Mowi ASA has availed itself of the laws and privileges of the United States, filing
`
`forms with the United States Securities & Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and benefitting from
`
`its sale to United States investors of depositary shares evidenced by American depositary receipts
`
`through Citibank, N.A. in the United States. Marine Harvest further was listed on the New York
`
`Stock Exchange from 2014 until it was delisted in 2017, after posting record high earnings in 2016.
`
`37.
`
`In November of 2013, Marine Harvest ASA purchased a 25.81% ownership interest
`
`in Grieg ASA, which it later sold in May 2016, after Marine Harvest and Grieg had successfully
`
`raised prices across the industry and Grieg ASA reported its best ever quarterly results, “boosted
`
`by record-high salmon prices.” Marine Harvest ASA gained 511.8m Norwegian kroner (“NOK”)
`
`on its sale of the Grieg ASA shares.
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 15 of 96
`
`38.
`
`Defendant Mowi USA is a Florida limited liability company that maintains its
`
`principal place of business at 8550 N.W. 17th Street #105, Miami, Florida 33126. Mowi ASA
`
`wholly owns and controls its subsidiary Mowi USA for the purposes of causing Mowi USA to
`
`process salmon in Florida and Texas and distribute it to wholesalers, retailers, and others in Florida
`
`and elsewhere in the United States.
`
`39.
`
`In May of 2019, Mowi USA moved into its new seafood production plant in Miami
`
`which, at 106,000 square feet, is more than triple the size of its former United States production
`
`facility. Brattvoll, now of Mowi ASA, explained that the Miami factory is one of Mowi ASA’s
`
`biggest plants.
`
`40.
`
`Defendant Mowi Ducktrap is a Maine limited liability company and a wholly
`
`owned and controlled subsidiary of Mowi ASA. The company has its headquarters at 57 Little
`
`River Drive, Belfast, Maine 04915. Mowi Ducktrap sells processed salmon products, such as
`
`sliced smoked salmon, under a number of trade names, including Ducktrap and Kendall Brook.
`
`These products are sold throughout the United States, including Florida. For example, Mowi
`
`Ducktrap has promoted its Kendall Brook smoked salmon products at the Whole Foods Market
`
`PGA, located in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
`
`41.
`
`Defendant Mowi Canada West (“Mowi Canada”) (f/k/a Marine Harvest Canada) is
`
`a foreign corporation and wholly owned and controlled subsidiary of Mowi ASA. Mowi Canada
`
`is headquartered at 1334 Island Highway, Suite 124, Campbell River, British Columbia, V9W
`
`8C9, Canada. Mowi Canada processes salmon in British Columbia, Canada. Mowi ASA uses its
`
`ownership and control over Mowi Canada to sell Atlantic salmon in Canada and the United States,
`
`including Florida. As discussed above, Mowi ASA also targets the United States and Florida
`
`through its wholly owned and controlled subsidiary Mowi USA, and, to achieve that purpose,
`
`Mowi ASA uses its control over Mowi Canada to ship fresh salmon to Mowi USA in Florida and
`
`Mowi Ducktrap in Maine on a regular basis.
`
`42.
`
`Employees of Mowi Canada also attended the 2018 Aquaculture Innovation
`
`Workshop (“AIW”) held in Miami, Florida.
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-21551-CMA Document 447 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/28/2021 Page 16 of 96
`
`43.
`
`As evidenced in Mowi ASA’s 2018 annual report, Mowi ASA’s consolidated
`
`financial statements include its subsidiaries in the United States and Canada, such as Mowi USA,
`
`Mowi Canada, and Mowi Ducktrap.
`
`44.
`
`Through its financial, investor, and promotional materials, Mowi ASA (and
`
`formerly Marine Harvest ASA) clearly conveys that it consists of a single global, integrated entity,
`
`and Mowi USA, Mowi Canada, and Mowi Ducktrap are each agents and/or divisions of Mowi
`
`ASA. Each of the Mowi entities is vicariously liable for the conduct of the others because they
`
`operate as a single enterprise, whose over-arching objective—as relevant to the claims made in
`
`this complaint—is to distribute salmon within the United States. In addition, the presence of Mowi
`
`ASA, Mowi USA, Mowi Canada, and/or Mowi Ducktrap in the United States subjects all Mowi
`
`entities to the jurisdiction of this Court for the actions giving rise to this litigation.
`
`45. Mowi ASA, Mowi USA, Mowi Canada, and Mowi Ducktrap, as well as the former
`
`iterations of these companies under the Marine Harvest brand, are collectively referred to herein
`
`as “Mowi” (or “Marine Harvest” where appropriate) and are vicariously liable for the antitrust
`
`violations of each of them described herein.
`
`46.
`
`Ocean Quality/Grieg Defendants. Defendant Grieg Seafood ASA (“Grieg ASA”)
`
`is a foreign corporation that describes itself as “one of the world’s leading fish farming companies,
`
`specializing in Atlantic salmon.” Grieg ASA owns farming facilities in Finnmark and Rogaland
`
`in Norway, British Columbia in Canada, and Shetland in the United Kingdom. The company is
`
`headquartered at C. Sundtsgate 17/19, 5004, Bergen, 5004, Norway. Grieg ASA is listed on the
`
`Oslo Stock Exchange.
`
`47.
`
`Grieg ASA targets and sells its salmon to the United States, including Florida, using
`
`its majority-owned sales agent, Ocean Quality AS (“OQ AS”). This company, founded in
`
`November 2010, operates in the United States and Canada through three wholly owned
`
`subsidiaries, Defendants Ocean Quality N.A. Inc. (“OQ N