Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 1 of 677 PageID #:663988
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`EASTERN DIVISION
`
`
`
`IN RE BROILER CHICKEN ANTITRUST
`LITIGATION
`
`
`THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
`
`All Track 2 Direct Action Plaintiffs
`
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 1:16-cv-08637
`
`Judge Thomas M. Durkin
`
`Magistrate Judge Jeffrey T. Gilbert
`
`FILED UNDER SEAL
`
`
`FIELDALE FARMS CORPORATION’S ANSWER AND DEFENSES
`TO TRACK 2 DIRECT ACTION PLAINTIFFS’
`SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
`
`Fieldale Farms Corporation answers Track 2 Direct Action Plaintiffs’ (“Plaintiffs”) Second
`
`Amended Consolidated Complaint (“Complaint”) as follows.1 Fieldale denies each and every
`
`allegation in Plaintiffs’ Complaint except as expressly admitted below.
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION2
`
`DAPs filed the original consolidated complaint [ECF Nos. 3924, 3922], an
`amended consolidated complaint [ECF Nos. 4243, 4244], and this amended consolidated
`complaint, in accordance with the Court’s direction “to streamline the pleadings so that
`there is only one complaint and one answer on the docket for the Court and parties to
`reference, rather than over 100 separate direct-action complaints.” [ECF No. 4139 at 5].
`As the Court has explained, “the purpose of the consolidated complaint [was] not to force
`any individual plaintiff to concede or make any allegation or claim.” Id. DAPs understand
`
`
`1 For the purposes of this Consolidated Answer, “Defendants” refers only by the Defendants named
`by each DAP. Further, to distinguish Agri Stats from other Defendants who actually produced
`broiler chicken, the term “Producer Defendants” does not include Agri Stats. Further still,
`“Producer Defendants” refers to any Defendant family that produces broiler chicken without
`specifying which entity within that family produces broiler chicken, and without conceding that
`they all do.
`
`2 Fieldale includes Plaintiffs’ headers for the convenience of the Court. These headers contain no
`factual allegations to which a response is required. To the extent a response is required, Fieldale
`denies all factual allegations contained in Plaintiffs’ headers and introductory clauses to complaint
`paragraphs.
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 2 of 677 PageID #:663989
`
`
`the Court’s orders to preserve the independent legal existence of each DAP case.
`
`Pursuant to the Court’s order for Track Two DAPs to file “an amended
`consolidated complaint” that “will be the operative complaint for Track Two DAPs” [ECF
`No. 5306], Track Two Direct Action Plaintiffs (“DAPs” or “Plaintiffs”) submit this
`pleading to illustrate, but not exhaustively catalog, material allegations against the
`Defendants.
`
`Because of differences in the underlying DAP complaints, certain factual
`allegations may only relate or be material to the claims of certain DAPs. A given DAP
`does not necessarily adopt the allegations, theories or legal positions of other DAPs.
`
`The submission of this consolidated complaint should not be construed as a waiver
`or relinquishment of any DAP’s rights, including the due-process right to proceed outside
`of the putative class in this case and to prosecute claims separately in a direct action with
`counsel of each DAP’s choosing. DAPs have not filed identical complaints and, in many
`instances, have sued different defendants and asserted different claims. By compiling the
`factual allegations and claims from the various complaints pursuant to this Court’s order,
`DAPs do not concede that consolidation beyond that permitted by the Federal Rules of
`Civil Procedure would be proper, especially for trial.
`
`This Complaint is organized as follows: Section II sets out a chart identifying each
`Plaintiff and (1) the docket number on the consolidated docket for the underlying DAP
`complaint, (2) the Defendants named in the DAP complaint (if a Plaintiff has dismissed a
`Defendant, that Defendant is no longer listed in the Defendant column but in the named
`co-conspirator column), (3) the co-conspirators named in the DAP complaint, and (4) the
`causes of action asserted in the DAP complaint. Sections III through X set out the factual
`allegations. Section XI states all of the causes of action asserted by any DAP.
`
`FN 1: Given the consolidated nature of this complaint, the plural usage of the term
`“Plaintiffs” is used throughout to generally describe one or more DAPs but should
`not be construed to necessarily refer to all DAPs for purposes of all factual
`allegations or legal causes of action as explained infra in this document.
`
`FN 2: DAPs objected to filing a consolidated complaint [ECF No. 3625, 4695],
`and maintain those objections for all purposes, including any appeals.
`
`FN 3: For example, some DAPs chose not to sue certain Defendants sued by other
`DAPs. Some DAPs decided to include RICO claims in their complaint; many did
`not. Many DAPs filed only Sherman Act claims. Others included state law claims,
`and some include indirect purchaser claims in their complaints. Each DAP has
`performed its own legal analysis of the causes of action applicable to it based on
`the facts specific to each DAP.
`
`FN 4: In submitting this pleading, DAPs continue to maintain their “separate legal
`existence” and object to any loss of their individual due process rights. In re
`Fluidmaster, 149 F.Supp.3d 940, 947 (N.D. Ill. 2016) (quoting In re Refrigerant
`Compressors Antitrust Litig., 731 F.3d 586, 590-91 (6th Cir. 2013)); In re Zimmer
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 3 of 677 PageID #:663990
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 3 of 677 PagelD #:663990
`
`Nexgen Knee Implant Prods. Liab. Litig., MDL 2272, 2012 WL 3582708, at *3
`(N.D.Ill. Aug. 16, 2012) (collecting cases that state that “a master or consolidated
`complaintis a procedural device used to promotejudicial efficiency and economy,
`not to be given the same effect as an ordinary complaint or considered to merge
`the suits into a single cause, or changethe rights ofthe parties, or make those who
`are parties in one suitparties in another.”) (internal quotation marks omitted).
`
`ANSWER: Plaintiffs’ “Introduction” contains no factual allegations to which a response
`
`is required.
`
`Instead, it contains Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions and characterizations ofthis action,
`
`including their interpretation of orders of this Court and legal argumentrelated to the scope and
`
`propriety of those orders. To the extent a response is required, Fieldale denies all allegations in
`
`the Introduction, including those in the accompanying Footnotes.
`
`Il.
`
`CHART OF DIRECT ACTION PLAINTIFF CASES
`
` Causes of Action
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Betereace ix
`Named Defendants
`Winued Ga
`(Not Previously
`:
`.
`to Sealed
`Dismissed)
`Conspirators (if any)
`
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`
`
`Restrictions); Count 3
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`
`
`
`Sherman Act for GA Dock
`anipulation); Count 5
`
`
`
`3 Claims against the Rabobank Defendants were dismissed with prejudice. [ECF No. 5429].
`A motion for entry ofjudgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) has been filed. [ECF No. 5441].
`
`[ECF No. 5429].
`* Claims against the Rabobank Defendants were dismissed with prejudice.
`A motion for entry ofjudgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) has been filed. [ECF No. 5441].
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 4 of 677 PageID #:663991
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 4 of 677 PagelD #:663991
`
`Underlying
`
`teoee:
`eferenceis
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`
`Named Defendants
`.
`oe Erovionly
`
`Neusd Ca
`5S
`Conspirators (if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`applicable)
`
`
`
`
`(Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`Jetro Holdings,
`A gri Stats; Case;
`Allen Harim; Keystone
`
`laxton: Fieldale; Foster
`i
`for all Anticompetitive
`ILLC
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`
`
`
`\Ahold Delhaize
`[USA,Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`A nticompetitive Conduct):
`laxton: Fieldale; Foster
`
` ount 2 (Sherman Act, for
`Output Restriction, Pled in
`he Alternative); Count 3
`Sherman Act, for Georgia
`Dock Price-Fixing, Pled in
`he Alternative); Count 4
`Sherman Act, for Bid-
`
`
`
`
`Simmons; Wayne
`
`
`
`CO Based on 16-14- A(a));
`
`
`ount 8 (GA RICO
`
`Based on 16-14-4(b)); Count
`
`(Federal RICO); Count 19
`
`
`Common Law Fraud Against!
`
`he GA Dock Defendants):
`
`
`‘ount 20 (Breachof the
`
`
`ovenant of Good Faith and
`
`
`Fair Dealing Against the GA
`Dock Defendants); Count 21
`
`
`egligent Misrepresentation,
`
`led in the Alternative to
`
`
`ount 19); Count 22 (Unjust
`
`Enrichment Against the GA
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`*s Wholesale
`|Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`A gri Stats; Case;
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`laxton: Fieldale; Foster
`(Club, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`en Harim; Keystone
`
`ee Amick
`
`‘onduct): Count 2 (Sherman
`
`
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 5 of 677 PageID #:663992
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 5 of 677 PagelD #:663992
`
`Underlying teoee:
`Named Defendants
`Neusd Ca
`.
`5S
`eferenceis
`oe Erovionly
`Conspirators (if any)
`to Sealed
`
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Harrison: House of
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ispy Krunchy
`Foods, LLC
`
`(Cheney Bros., Inc.
`
`
`[ECF 2115
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`
`
`Act Claim for Output
`
`
`Harrison; House of
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 6 of 677 PageID #:663993
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 6 of 677 PagelD #:663993
`
`
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`Named Defendants
`
`PlaintiffName|(Reference is|(Not Previously |, Named Co” Causea ofActin
`
`to Sealed
`Dismissed)
`onspirators (if any)
`Version,if
`applicable)
`
`
`
`Restriction); Count 3
`Raeford: Koch; Mar-Jac:
`Sherman Act Claim for GA
`IMountaire; O.K. Foods:
`
`
`Dock Manipulation); Count 5
`eco; Perdue; Sanderson;
`
`Simmons; Tyson; Wayne
`
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`laxton; Fieldale;> Foste
`
`Shamrock Foods
`\Company
`
`
`
`
`
`Simmons; Tyson;
`‘ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`ayne; Keystone Foods
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`
`And Bid-Rigging Defendants
`
` nited Food
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`
`
`laxton; Fieldale:° Foste
`Farms; George’s;
`Harrison; House of
`
`Service, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`Simmons; Tyson;
`
`Wayne: Keystone Foods
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`
`Bid- Rigging Defendants for
`
`° Shamrock Foods Companyno longer has claims pending against Fieldale pursuant to the July
`10, 2023 Notice filed by Certain Restaurant DAPs (declining to pursue Counts 1-3, 6 against
`Fieldale) and the Court’s February 11, 2025 Order. Dkt. 7501 (dismissing Counts 1, 4, 5 and 6
`against Fieldale).
`
`® United Food Service, Inc. no longerhas claims pendingagainst Fieldale pursuantto the July 10,
`2023 Notice filed by Certain Restaurant DAPs (declining to pursue Counts 1-3, 6 against Fieldale)
`and the Court’s February 11, 2025 Order. Dkt. 7501 ((dismissing Counts 1, 4, 5 and 6 against
`Fieldale).
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 7 of 677 PageID #:663994
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 7 of 677 PagelD #:663994
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`Named Defendants
`PlaintiffName|(Reference is|(Not Previously |, Named Co” Causea ofActin
`
`to Sealed
`Dismissed)
`onspirators (if any)
`Version,if
`
`
`
`applicable)
`
`
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing); Count 6 (Violation
`Of 15 U.S.C.§ 1 Against
`
`
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`
`And Bid-Rigging Defendants
`
`
`
` Quirch Foods, Agri Stats; Claxton;
`
`
`IFieldale: Foster Farms;
`ILLC,f/k/a Quirch
`
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`[Foods Co.
`
`[House of Raeford:
`
`IKeystone Foods; Koch:
`| apesac; ee
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`‘yson; Wayne
`
`
`
` herwood Food
`A gri Stats; Case;
`Allen Harim: Keystone
`laxton: Fieldale; Foster
`i
`(Distributors, L.L.C.
`
`
`Farms; George’s;
`Harrison; House of
`
`
`
`
` A gri Stats; Case;
`
`laxton: Fieldale; Foster
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 8 of 677 PageID #:663995
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 8 of 677 PagelD #:663995
`
`Underlying
`
`applicable)
`
`Complaint
`(Referenceis
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`
`Named C
`ae
`Conspirators (if any)
`
`Causesof Action
`
`
`
`
`Western Boxed
`(Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`A gri Stats; Case;
`Allen Harim; Keystone
`
`
`laxton: Fieldale; Foster
`for all Anticompetitive
`[MeatDistributors,
`
`Inc.
`
`igging, GA Dock
` amilton Meat,
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`
`House of Raeford: Mar-
`
`Restaurants, Inc.
`
`Allen Harim; Keystone
`oods: Amick
`
`;
`
`5
`
`gri
`
`A
`
`ILLC
`
`
`\[America, LLC
`
` [Darden
`
`
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 9 of 677 PageID #:663996
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 9 of 677 PagelD #:663996
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`Named Defendants
`
`
`PlaintiffName|(Referenceis (Not Previously Cc Named ce Causes ofAction
`to Sealed
`Dismissed)
`onspirators (if any)
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`
`
`
`
`heckers Drive-In
`Restaurants, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pled in the Alternative to
`
`
`Pinnacle Foods,
`Inc.
`
`
`
`ount 4); Count 6 (Violation
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`
`
`And Bid- Rigging Defendants
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`| ieldale; Pilgrim’s
`laxton: Foster Farms;
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford:
`Keystone Foods; Koch;
`IMar-Jac; Mountaire:
`O.K. Foods; Peco:
`erdue; Sanderson:
`i
`
`
`
`for GA Dock Manipulation,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`ount 1); Count 4 (Sherman
`
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging
`
`and Price-Fixing) Count 5
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 10 of 677 PageID #:663997
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 10 of 677 PagelD #:663997
`
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`Named Defendants
`(Referenceis
`a
`Named Co-
`(Not Previously
`q
`:
`to Sealed
`Dismissed)
`Conspirators (if any)
`
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`And Bid- Rigging Defendants
`
`
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Fieldale; Pilgrim’s
`Pride; Allen Harim:
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`laxton; Foster Farms;
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`[House of Raeford:
`[Keystone Foods; Koch:
`IMar-Jac: Mountaire:
`O.K. Foods: Peco:
`
`
`ount 1); Count 4 (Sherman
`
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging
`
`
`and Price-Fixing) Count 5
`
`
`led in the Alternative to
`
`ount 4): Count 6 (Violation
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`And Bid- Rigging Defendants
`
`
`
`
`
`
`INestlé USA, Inc.
`
`A gri Stats; Case:
`‘laxton: Foster Farms:
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford:
`[Keystone Foods; Koch;
`IMar-Jac: Mountaire:
`O.K. Foods; Peco:
`
`
`and Price-Fixing) Count 5
`Alternative Bid-Rigging,
`led in the Alternative to
`
`
`ount 4); Count 6 (Violation
`
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`
`And Bid- Reems Defendants
`
`ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`
`
`gri Stats; Case;
`Fieldale; Pilgrim’s
`
`laxton:; Foster Farms;
`for all Anticompetitive
`Pride; Allen Harim:
`[PetCare Company
`
`
`
`
`
`‘ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 11 of 677 PageID #:663998
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 11 of 677 PagelD #:663998
`
`Underlying
`
`teoee:
`eference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Named Defendants
`.
`ation Reevenaly,
`
`Neusd Ca
`=
`Conspirators (if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`
`Pled in the Alternative to
`
`ount 4); Count 6 (Violation
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`
`
`And Bid- Rigging Defendants
`
`For Price-Fixin
`
`
`
`Amick, Peco, Pilgrim’s
`(Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`Pride, and all other
`for all Anticompetitive
`individuals/entities
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`
`Act Claim for Output
`
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`
`
`igging); Count 5 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging
`
`
` Wal-Mart Stores
`ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`lEast, LP
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`
`Act Claim for Output
`
`
`Restriction); Count 3
`
`Sherman Act Claim for GA
`
`
`Dock Manipulation); Count 4
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`
`igging); Count 5 (Sherman
`
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging
`
`A
`ori
`i
`:
`Amick, Peco, Pilgrim’s
`
`:
`;
`ide, and all other
`
` estriction); Count 3
`
`
`
`Wal-Mart Stores
`[Arkansas, LLC
`
`Sherman Act Claim for GA
`
`
`
`Sherman Act Claim for GA
`
`
` IECF 2260-2
`Amick, Peco, Pilgrim’s
`
`de, and all other
`
`11
`
`
`
` al-Mart Stores
`[Texas, LLC
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 12 of 677 PageID #:663999
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 12 of 677 PagelD #:663999
`
`Louisiana, LLC
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging); Count 5 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`Named Defendants
`
`PlaintiffName|(Reference is|(Not Previously |, Named Co” Causea ofActin
`
`
`to Sealed
`Dismissed)
`onspirators (if any)
`
`Version,if
`applicable)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IECF 2260-2
`
`A
`
`
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging
`
`Claim
`
`
`Sam’s West, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging):;
`
`ount 6 (Violation Of 15
`S.C. § 1 Against Georgia
`
`IECF 2260-2
`
`A
`
`cri
`
`:
`
`5
`
`Ami
`
`individuals/entities
`Harrison; House of
`aeford; Koch: Mar- Jac:iwhose conspiratorial
`IMountaire; O.K. Foods;
`i
`i
`
`i
`
`
`
`A
`
`Services Group of
`[America, Inc.
`
`ECF 2274-1
`
` estriction); Count 3
`Sherman Act for GA Dock
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 13 of 677 PageID #:664000
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 13 of 677 PagelD #:664000
`
` Causes of Action
` :
`
`Underlying
`
`teoee:
`eferenceis
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Neusd Ca
`Named Defendants
`.
`5S
`nt eee Conspirators (if any)
`
`:
`laxton: Fieldale: Foster [Keystone Foods;
`
`ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`Pilgrim’s Pride
`
` Act Claim for Price Fixing):
`
`
`ount 11 (Violation of
`
`Arizona’s Antitrust Act);
`
`‘ount 13 (Violation of the
`
`inn. Antitrust Law); Count
`
`18 (Unjust Enrichment)
`
`
`
`\America, Inc.
`
`
`he Minn. Consumer Fraud
` Act); Count 24 (Violation of
`
`
`
`
`only in Counts 1, 2, and 3];
`ount 2 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`
`
`[Wood,Ltd.
`
` Gibson, Greco &
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`:
`laxton; Foster Farms;
`|Fieldale; Keystone
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 14 of 677 PageID #:664001
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 14 of 677 PagelD #:664001
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`Named Defendants
`
`
`PlaintiffName|(Referenceis (Not Previously Cc Named ce Causes ofAction
`to Sealed
`Dismissed)
`onspirators (if any)
`Version, if
`
`
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`:
`
`Management
`laxton; Fieldale; Foster [Keystone Foods;
`(Corporation
`:
`:
`Pilgrim’s Pride
`
`
`only in Counts 1, 2, and 3]:
`ount 2 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`anaies —
`
`applicable)
`
`
`
`
`
`ount 15 (Violation of the
`
`
`
`General Business Law);
`
`[Anaheim Wings,
`ILLC,d/b/a Hooters
`lof Anaheim
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Act Claim for Price Fixing);
`
`ount 16 (Violation of
`
`alifornia’s Cartwright Act):
`
`ount 17 (Violation of
`alifornia’s UCL); Count 18
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 15 of 677 PageID #:664002
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 15 of 677 PagelD #:664002
`
`Underlying
`
`Causesof Action
`
`
`Complaint
`Named Defendants
`Named C
`(Referenceis
`(Not Previously
`ae
`to Sealed
`aE
`Conspirators (if any)
`
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`
`Gaslamp Wings,
`A gri Stats; Case;
`A
`im:
`ick:
`ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`ILLC, previously
`laxton; Fieldale; Foster [Keystone Foods;
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`\d/b/a Hooters of
`:
`:
`Pilgrim’s Pride
`i
`San Diego
`
`
`
` ission Valley
`
`
`ount 16 (Violation of
`
`alifornia’s Cartwright Act);
`
`
`ount 17 (Violation of
`
`
`alifornia’s UCL); Count 18
`
`
`
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`:
`
`Wings, LLC, d/b/a
`laxton; Fieldale; Foster [Keystone Foods:
`
`
`Farms; George’s:
`Pilgrim’s Pride
`onduct) [Mission Valley
`[Hooters of Mission
`[Valley
`Harrison; House of
`Wings seeks injunctive and
`
`
`
`
`
`ount 16 (Violation of
`
`alifornia’s Cartwright Act):
`
`
`
` ount 17 (Violation of
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Oceanside Wings,
`ILLC, previously
`\d/b/a Hooters of
`(Oceanside
`
`
`
`
`
`Sherman Act Claim for GA
`(Sherman Act Claim for Bid
`
`IDock Manipulation); Count 5
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 16 of 677 PageID #:664003
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 16 of 677 PagelD #:664003
`
`Underlying Complaint
`
`
`
`Named Defendants
`a
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named Co-
`q
`:
`Conspirators (if any)
`
`(Referenceis
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`ount 16 (Violation of
`
`
`
`
` Act Claim for Price Fixing);
`ount 16 (Violation of
`
`alifornia’s Cartwright Act):
`
`ount 17 (Violation of
`
`alifornia’s UCL); Count 18
`
`Wiring, LLC, d/b/a
`
`[Hooters of San
`
`[Marcos
`Wings seeks injunctive and
`equitable relief only in
`
`
`
`
`
`Sherman Act Gian:for Bid
`
`
`
`Act Claim for Price Fixing);
`ount 16 (Violation of
`alifornia’s Cartwright Act);
`
`ount 17 (Violation of
`
`alifornia’s UCL); Count 18
`
`
`
`
`
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`Ontario Wings,
`
`
`eystone Foods;
`laxton: Fieldale; Foster
`for all Anticompetitive
`ILLC,d/b/a Hooters
`.
`
`onduct)
`[Ontario Wings
`of Ontario
`
`
`
`16
`
`(Costa Mesa Wings. [ECF 3066
`ILLC, d/b/a Hooters
`lof Costa Mesa
`
`
`A
`A gri Stats; Case;
`laxton; Fieldale; Foster [Keystone Foods:
`:
`I
`Pilgrim’s Pride
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 17 of 677 PageID #:664004
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 17 of 677 PagelD #:664004
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Referenceis
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`
`Named Defendants
`a
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named Co-
`q
`:
`Conspirators (if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`applicable)
`
`seeks injunctive and equitable
`
`
`
`ount 17 (Violation of
`
`alifornia’s UCL); Count 18
`njust Enrichment)
`
`
` South Gate Wings, JECF 3066
`ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`onduct) [South Gate Wings
`
`Harrison: House of
`
`Simmons; Tyson; Wayne
`
`eco; eels ne!
`Simmons; Tyson; Wayne
`
`17
`
`
`
`ILLC, d/b/a Hooters
`lof Hollywood
`
`ILLC,d/b/a Hooters
`lof South Gate
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 18 of 677 PageID #:664005
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 18 of 677 PagelD #:664005
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`pees
`q
`:
`Conspirators (if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`alifornia’s Cartwright Act);
`
`
`
`ount 17 (Violation of
`
`
`
`
`Wings Over Long [ECF 3066
`Beach, LLC, d/b/a
`
`
` onduct) [Wings Over Long
`ooters of Long
`
`ach
`
`each seeks injunctive and
`
`equitable relief only in
`
`ounts 1, 2, and 3]; Count 2
`
`
`Sherman Act Claim for
`
`Output Restriction); Count 3
`
`Sherman Act Claim for GA
`
`
`Dock Manipulation); Count 5
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid
`
`igging); Count 6 (Sherman
`
`
`Act Claim for Price Fixing);
`
`ount 16 (Violation of
`
`alifornia’s Cartwright Act);
`
`ount 17 (Violation of
`
`
`alifornia’s UCL); Count 18
`
`
`
` Bonita Plaza
`A gri Stats; Case;
`A
`im:
`ick;
`ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`Wings, LLC, d/b/a
`laxton; Fieldale; Foster [Keystone Foods:
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`
`ooters of Plaza
`:
`E
`Pilgrim’s Pride
`onduct) [Bonita Plaza
`mita
`Wings seeks injunctive and
`
`equitable relief only in
`
`ounts 1, 2, and 3]; Count 2
`
`
`Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction); Count 3
`Sherman Act Claim for GA
`
`
`
`
`
`
`‘ount 16 (Violation of
`
`alifornia’s Cartwright Act);
`
`
`ount 17 (Violation of
`
`
`
` Downtown Wings, JECF 3066
`ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`for all Anticompetitive
`ILLC, previously
`
`
`onduct) [Downtown Wings
`\d/b/a Hooters of
`
`seeks injunctive and equitable
`[Downtown LA
`elief only in Counts 1, 2, and
`
`: Count 2 (Sherman Act
`
`18
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 19 of 677 PageID #:664006
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 19 of 677 PagelD #:664006
`
`Underlying
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`
`PlaintiffName|(Referenceis (Not Previously eea a Causes ofAction
`to Sealed
`Conspirators (if any)
`Version, if
`
`applicable)
`
`
`laim for Output
`estriction); Count 3
`
`
`Sherman Act Claim for GA
`
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid
`
`Rigging); Count 6 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Price Fixing);
`
`
`
`[Amigos Meat
`Distributors, LP
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`A
`gri
`5
`=
`Amick; George’s; Peco
`
` Raeford: Koch; Mar- Jac;
`
`
`
`
`
`[Amigos Meat &
`Poultry, LLC
`
`[Amigos Meat
`[Distributors East
`ILP
`
`IMountaire; O.K. Foods;
`Perdue; Pilgrim’s Pride:
`
`i
`
`3
`
`Ss
`
`Amick; George’s; Peco
`
`[Amigos Meat
`[Distributors West.
`ILP
`
`
`
`gri Stats; Case;
`Amick; George’s; Peco
`laxton:; Foster Farms;
`
`
`
`Alternative to Count1);
`
`19
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`laxton; Fieldale;’ Foste
`
`
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`Wayne: Keystone Foods
`
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`And Bid-Rigging Defendants
`
`Agri Stats; Amick; Case;
`|Allen Harim; Fieldale
`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 20 of 677 PageID #:664007
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 20 of 677 PagelD #:664007
`
`Named Defendants
`
`PlaintiffName|(Referenceis (Not Previously eea a Causes ofAction
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`
`
`
`
`PJ Food Service,
`
`[ECF 3086-1
`
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`for GA Dock Manipulation,
`
`4
`
`Underlying Complaint
`Conspirators (if any)
`
`
`
`laxton: Foster Farms;
`[Keystone; Amick
`
`
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`estriction); Count 3
`
`Sherman Act Claim for GA
`
`
`Dock Manipulation): Count 4
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`
`
`Rigging and Price-Fixing);
`ount 5 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`for Bid-Rigging): Count 6
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`
`
`
`
`
`Alternative); Count 3
`(Sherman Act Claim for GA
`
`
`7 El Pollo Loco,Inc. no longerhasclaims pending againstFieldale pursuantto the July 10, 2023
`Notice filed by Certain Restaurant DAPs(declining to pursue Counts 1-3, 6 against Fieldale) and
`the Court’s February 11, 2025 Order. Dkt. 7501 ((dismissing Counts 1, 4, 5 and 6 against Fieldale).
`
`20
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 21 of 677 PageID #:664008
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 21 of 677 PagelD #:664008
`
`Named Defendants
`
`
`PlaintiffName|(Referenceis (Not Previously eea a Causes ofAction
`to Sealed
`ae
`Conspirators (if any)
`Version, if
`
`
`
`Underlying Complaint
`applicable)
`
`| oods; Peco: Perdue:
`Dock Manipulation, Pled in
`he Alternative to Count 1);
`
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`‘ount 5 (Sherman Act Claim
`‘yson; Wayne
`for Bid-Rigging Pled in the
`
`
`
`
`[Kraft Heinz Foods IECF 3572
`
`Amick, Agri Stats; Case; [Keystone Foods;
`ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`i
`
`
`‘onduct)
`
`
`
`
`‘ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`Kutesreateal Inc.
`for all Anticompetitive
`eae Smokey
`
`
`
`nes, Inc.)
`
`
`led in the Alternative to
`Simmons; Tyson;
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`Wayne; Keystone Foods
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`id- Rigging Defendants for
`
`id-Rigging and Price-
`
`Fixing); Count 6 (Violation
`
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`
`And Bid-Rigging Defendants
`
`
`
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`
`ckets Group.
`laxton; Fieldale:® Foste
`Ine
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`
`
`IMountaire: O.K. Foods:
`‘ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`
`8 The Johnny Rockets Group, Inc. no longer has claims pending against Fieldale pursuantto the
`July 10, 2023 Notice filed by Certain Restaurant DAPs (declining to pursue Counts 1-3, 6 against
`Fieldale) and the Court’s February 11, 2025 Order. Dkt. 7501 ((dismissing Counts 1, 4, 5 and 6
`against Fieldale).
`
`21
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 22 of 677 PageID #:664009
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 22 of 677 PagelD #:664009
`
`Named Defendants
`
`
`PlaintiffName|(Referenceis (Not Previously eea a Causes ofAction
`to Sealed
`ae
`Conspirators (if any)
`Version, if
`
`
`
`Underlying Complaint
`applicable)
`
`for GA Dock Manipulation,
`
`
`Simmons; Tyson;
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`Wayne: Keystone Foods
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`id- Rigging Defendants for
`
`
`id-Rigging and Price-
`
`Fixing); Count 6 (Violation
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`
`And Bid-Rigging Defendants
`
`
`
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`‘ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`
` sania Friendly’s)
`laxton: Fieldale;
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`
`Foster Farms;
`
`
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`
`[House of Raeford:
`IKoch: Mar-Jac:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`Bid- Rigging Defendants for
`
`
`
`Fixing); Count6 (Violation
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`
`And Bid-Rigging Defendants
`
`
`
` Boston Market
`‘ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`(Corporation
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`Simmons; Wayne;
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`IKeystone Foods
`
`
`id- Rigging Defendants for
`id-Rigging and Price-
`
`
`
`° Boston Market Corporation no longerhas claims pending against Fieldale pursuant to the July
`10, 2023 Notice filed by Certain Restaurant DAPs (declining to pursue Counts 1-3, 6 against
`Fieldale) and the Court’s February 11, 2025 Order. Dkt. 7501 (dismissing Counts 1, 4, 5 and 6
`against Fieldale).
`
`22
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 23 of 677 PageID #:664010
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 23 of 677 PagelD #:664010
`
`Underlying Complaint
`Named Defendants
`
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Referenceis i oe
`Causes of Action
`to Sealed
`( Dismissed) :
`Conspirators (ifany)
`Not Previous!
`:
`:
`
`
`Fixing); Count 6 (Violation
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`
`
`And Bid-Rigging Defendants
`
`
`
`ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`gri Stats; Case;
`for all Anticompetitive
`‘laxton: Foster Farms;
`
`
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid
`
`igging); Count 6 (Sherman
`
`Act Claim for Price Fixing
`
`
`
`he Fresh Market,
`Agri Stats; Case;
`:
`im;
`i
`Inc.
`laxton: Foster Farms;
`[Fieldale Farms:
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`Keystone Foods;
`E
`; Pilgrim’s Pride
`
`Version,if
`applicable)
`
`IECF 3819-1
`
`
`
`IECF 3820-1
`
`1
`laxton: Foster Farms;
`orge’s; Harrison;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`| = Durbin:
`
`‘ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`IMountaire: O.K. Foods:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`White Castle
`[Purchasing Co.
`
`IECF 4408
`
`10©WiisCanisPurchasingesCastle Purchasing Co. no longer has claims pending against Fieldale pursuantto the July
`10, 2023 Notice filed by Certain Restaurant DAPs (declining to pursue Counts 1-3, 6 against
`Fieldale) and the Court’s February 11, 2025 Order. Dkt. 7501 ((dismissing Counts 1, 4, 5 and 6
`against Fieldale).
`
`23
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 24 of 677 PageID #:664011
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 24 of 677 PagelD #:664011
`
`Named Defendants
`
`
`PlaintiffName|(Referenceis (Not Previously eea a Causes ofAction
`to Sealed
`Conspirators (if any)
`Version,if
`
`
`
`Underlying Complaint
`applicable) ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`Wayne: Keystone Foods
`
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`And Bid-Rigging Defendants
`
`
`
`
`
`(Captain D’s LLC
`
`A gri Stats; Case;
`
`Foster Farms; George’s:
`Harrison: House of
`
`
`
`led in the Alternative to
`
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`Wayne; Keystone Foods
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`id- Rigging Defendants for
`
`id-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing); Count6 (Violation
`
`Of 15 U.S.C. § 1 Against
`
`eorgia Dock Defendants
`
`And Bid-Rigging Defendants
`
`
` (Cracker Barrel Old ECF 4403
`‘ount 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`for all Anticompetitive
`(Country Store, Inc.
`land CBOCS
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Distribution, Inc.
`
`
`
`1! Captain D’s LLC nolongerhas claims pending against Fieldale pursuant to the July 10, 2023
`Notice filed by Certain Restaurant DAPs (declining to pursue Counts 1-3, 6 against Fieldale) and
`the Court’s February 11, 2025 Order. Dkt. 7501 ((dismissing Counts 1, 4, 5 and 6 against Fieldale).
`
`12 Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc. and CBOCSDistribution, Inc. no longer have claims
`pending against Fieldale pursuant to the July 10, 2023 Notice filed by Certain Restaurant DAPs
`(declining to pursue Counts 1-3, 6 against Fieldale) and the Court’s February 11, 2025 Order. Dkt.
`7501 ((dismissing Counts 1, 4, 5 and 6 against Fieldale).
`
`24
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 25 of 677 PageID #:664012
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7635 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 25 of 677 PagelD #:664012
`
`Named Defendants
`PlaintiffName|(Reference is|(Not Previously |, Named Co” Causea ofActin
`
`to Sealed
`Dismissed)
`onspirators (if any)
`Version,if
`
`
`
`Underlying Complaint
`applicable)
`
`
`
`
`Simmons; Tyson;
`Pled in the Alternative to
`
`Wayne; Keystone Foods
`mr 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`Of
`15 U.S.C.§ 1 Against
`
`id- Rigging Defen