throbber
Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 1 of 598 PageID #:672061
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`EASTERN DIVISION
`
`IN RE BROILER CHICKEN ANTITRUST
`LITIGATION
`
`Civil Action No. 1:16-cv-08637 Judge
`
`Thomas M. Durkin Magistrate Judge
`
`THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
`
`Jeffrey T. Gilbert
`
`All Track 2 Direct Action Plaintiffs
`
`PUBLIC REDACTED VERSION
`
`WAYNE FARMS’ ANSWER TO
`TRACK 2 DIRECT ACTION PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED
`CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 2 of 598 PageID #:672062
`
`
`
`Defendant Wayne Farms LLC (“Wayne Farms”) hereby answers and sets forth its
`
`affirmative defenses to Track 2 Direct Action Plaintiffs’ (“Plaintiffs”) Second Amended
`
`Consolidated Complaint and Demand For Jury Trial (“Complaint”) (ECF No. 5456), and any
`
`subsequently filed joinders thereto, as follows: Wayne Farms denies each and every allegation in
`
`Plaintiffs’ Complaint except as expressly admitted below.
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION1
`
`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
`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”)1 submit this
`pleading to illustrate, but not exhaustively catalog, material allegations against the
`Defendants.2
`
`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.3 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.4
`
`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
`
`1 Wayne Farms includes Plaintiffs’ headers and introductory clauses to complaint paragraphs 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, Wayne Farms denies all factual allegations contained
`in Plaintiffs’ headers and introductory clauses to complaint paragraphs.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 3 of 598 PageID #:672063
`
`
`
`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
`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
`complaint is a procedural device used to promote judicial 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 change the rights of the parties, or make those who
`are parties in one suit parties 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 of this
`
`action, including their interpretation of orders of this Court and legal argument related to the scope
`
`and propriety of those orders. To the extent a response is required, Wayne Farms denies all
`
`allegations in the Introduction, including those in the accompanying Footnotes.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 4 of 598 PageID #:672064
`
`II.
`
`CHART OF DIRECT ACTION PLAINTIFF CASES
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named
`Co-Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restrictions);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act for
`GA Dock Manipulation);
`Count 5 (Sherman Act
`Claim for Bid-Rigging)
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restrictions);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act for
`GA Dock Manipulation);
`Count 5 (Sherman Act
`Claim for Bid-Rigging)
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging, GA Dock
`Manipulation)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act, for
`all Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act, for Output
`Restriction, Pled in the
`Alternative); Count 3
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Sysco
`Corporation
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`ECF 4807;
`4808
`
`US Foods, Inc. ECF 4809;
`4810
`
`Jetro Holdings,
`LLC
`
`ECF 2130
`
`Fieldale; George’s;
`Peco; Rabobank5
`
`George’s; Peco;
`Tyson; Keystone;
`Rabobank6
`
`Allen Harim;
`Keystone Foods;
`Amick
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Foster
`Farms; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Keystone; Koch;
`Mar-Jac; Marshall
`Durbin; Mountaire;
`O.K. Foods; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`Harrison; House of
`Raeford; Koch; Mar-
`Jac; Marshall Durbin;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Wayne
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`Ahold Delhaize
`USA, Inc.
`
`ECF 2100
`
`Amick; Tyson
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Keystone Foods;
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 5 of 598 PageID #:672065
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named
`Co-Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Wayne
`
`BJ’s Wholesale
`Club, Inc.
`
`ECF 2125
`
`Allen Harim;
`Keystone Foods;
`Amick
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`5
`
`(Sherman Act, for Georgia
`Dock Price-Fixing, Pled in
`the Alternative); Count 4
`(Sherman Act, for Bid-
`Rigging and Price-Fixing,
`Pled in the Alternative);
`Count 5 (Sherman Act, for
`Bid-Rigging, Pled in the
`Alternative); Count 6
`(Sherman Act, for Price-
`Fixing, Pled in the
`Alternative); Count 7 (GA
`RICO Based on 16-14-
`4(a)); Count 8 (GA RICO
`Based on 16-14-4(b));
`Count 9 (Federal RICO);
`Count 19 (Common Law
`Fraud Against the GA
`Dock Defendants); Count
`20 (Breach of the
`Covenant of Good Faith
`and Fair Dealing Against
`the GA Dock
`Defendants); Count 21
`(Negligent
`Misrepresentation, Pled in
`the Alternative to Count
`19); Count 22 (Unjust
`Enrichment Against the
`GA Dock Defendants)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging, GA Dock
`Manipulation)
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 6 of 598 PageID #:672066
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`ECF 2134
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Maximum
`Quality Foods,
`Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`United
`Supermarkets,
`LLC
`
`ECF 2115
`
`Krispy Krunchy
`Foods, LLC
`
`ECF 2115
`
`Cheney Bros.,
`Inc.
`
`ECF 2115
`
`Allen Harim; Amick;
`Keystone Foods;
`Pilgrim’s Pride
`
`Allen Harim; Amick;
`Keystone Foods;
`Pilgrim’s Pride
`
`Allen Harim; Amick;
`Keystone Foods;
`Pilgrim’s Pride
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`
`6
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named
`Co-Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Mar-Jac; O.K. Foods;
`Peco; Simmons;
`Tyson
`
`Allen Harim; Amick;
`Keystone Foods;
`Koch; Mountaire;
`Perdue; Pilgrim’s
`Pride; Sanderson;
`Wayne
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging, GA Dock
`Manipulation)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Price Fixing)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Price Fixing)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 7 of 598 PageID #:672067
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Shamrock
`Foods
`Company
`
`ECF 2110
`
`United Food
`Service, Inc.
`
`ECF 2110
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named
`Co-Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Price Fixing)
`Allen Harim; Amick Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction, Pled
`in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 3
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`GA Dock Manipulation,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 4
`(Violation Of 15 U.S.C.
`§ 1 Against Bid- Rigging
`Defendants for Bid-
`Rigging and Price-
`Fixing); Count 6
`(Violation Of 15 U.S.C.
`§ 1 Against Georgia Dock
`Defendants And Bid-
`Rigging Defendants For
`Price- Fixing)
`Allen Harim; Amick Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction, Pled
`in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 3
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`GA Dock Manipulation,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 4
`(Violation Of 15 U.S.C.
`§ 1 Against Bid- Rigging
`Defendants for Bid-
`Rigging and Price-
`Fixing); Count 6
`(Violation Of 15 U.S.C.
`
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Marshall Durbin;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne;
`Keystone Foods
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Marshall Durbin;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne;
`Keystone Foods
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 8 of 598 PageID #:672068
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named
`Co-Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Allen Harim
`
`Quirch Foods,
`LLC, f/k/a
`Quirch Foods
`Co.
`
`ECF 1519-1 Agri Stats; Claxton;
`Fieldale; Foster
`Farms; George’s;
`Harrison; House of
`Raeford; Keystone
`Foods; Koch; Mar-
`Jac; Marshall Durbin;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`Sherwood Food
`Distributors,
`L.L.C.
`
`ECF 2135
`
`Harvest Meat
`Company, Inc.
`
`ECF 2135
`
`Allen Harim;
`Keystone Foods;
`Amick
`
`Allen Harim;
`Keystone Foods;
`Amick
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`8
`
`§ 1 Against Georgia Dock
`Defendants And Bid-
`Rigging Defendants For
`Price- Fixing)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction, Pled
`in the Alternative); Count
`3 (Sherman Act Claim for
`GA Dock Manipulation,
`Pled in the Alternative);
`Count 5 (Sherman Act
`Claim for Bid-Rigging
`Pled in the Alternative);
`Count 6 (Sherman Act
`Claim for Price Fixing,
`Pled in the Alternative)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging, GA Dock
`Manipulation)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 9 of 598 PageID #:672069
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named
`Co-Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`ECF 2135
`
`Western Boxed
`Meat
`Distributors,
`Inc.
`
`Hamilton Meat,
`LLC
`
`ECF 2135
`
`Allen Harim;
`Keystone Foods;
`Amick
`
`Allen Harim;
`Keystone Foods;
`Amick
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`Hooters of
`America, LLC
`
`ECF 2109
`
`House of Raeford;
`Mar-Jac; Perdue;
`Tyson
`
`Agri Stats; Allen
`Harim; Amick; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`Keystone Foods;
`Koch; Mountaire;
`O.K. Foods; Peco;
`
`9
`
`Fixing); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging, GA Dock
`Manipulation)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging, GA Dock
`Manipulation)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging, GA Dock
`Manipulation)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 10 of 598 PageID #:672070
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named
`Co-Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Darden
`Restaurants,
`Inc.
`
`ECF 2126
`
`ECF 2113
`
`Checkers
`Drive-In
`Restaurants,
`Inc.
`
`Conagra
`Brands, Inc.
`
`ECF 2264
`
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson;
`Simmons; Wayne
`
`Allen Harim;
`Keystone Foods;
`Amick
`
`Allen Harim; Amick;
`Keystone; Pilgrim’s
`Pride
`
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Allen Harim;
`Rabobank
`
`Manipulation); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Price Fixing)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging, GA Dock
`Manipulation)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Price Fixing); Count 10
`(Violation of FDUTPA)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction, Pled
`in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 3
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`GA Dock Manipulation,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 4
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Keystone Foods;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 11 of 598 PageID #:672071
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named
`Co-Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing) Count 5
`(Alternative Bid-Rigging,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`Count 4); Count 6
`(Violation Of 15 U.S.C.
`§ 1 Against Georgia Dock
`Defendants And Bid-
`Rigging Defendants For
`Price-Fixing)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction, Pled
`in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 3
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`GA Dock Manipulation,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing) Count 5
`(Alternative Bid-Rigging,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`Count 4); Count 6
`(Violation Of 15 U.S.C.
`§ 1 Against Georgia Dock
`Defendants And Bid-
`Rigging Defendants For
`Price-Fixing)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction, Pled
`in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 3
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`GA Dock Manipulation,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`
`Pinnacle Foods,
`Inc.
`
`ECF 2264
`
`Fieldale; Pilgrim’s
`Pride; Allen Harim;
`Rabobank
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Foster
`Farms; George’s;
`Harrison; House of
`Raeford; Keystone
`Foods; Koch; Mar-
`Jac; Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`Kraft Heinz
`Foods
`Company
`
`ECF 2264
`
`Fieldale; Pilgrim’s
`Pride; Allen Harim;
`Rabobank
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Foster
`Farms; George’s;
`Harrison; House of
`Raeford; Keystone
`Foods; Koch; Mar-
`Jac; Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 12 of 598 PageID #:672072
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named
`Co-Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Fixing) Count 5
`(Alternative Bid-Rigging,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`Count 4); Count 6
`(Violation Of 15 U.S.C.
`§ 1 Against Georgia Dock
`Defendants And Bid-
`Rigging Defendants For
`Price-Fixing)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction, Pled
`in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 3
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`GA Dock Manipulation,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing) Count 5
`(Alternative Bid-Rigging,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`Count 4); Count 6
`(Violation Of 15 U.S.C.
`§ 1 Against Georgia Dock
`Defendants And Bid-
`Rigging Defendants For
`Price-Fixing)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction, Pled
`in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 3
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`GA Dock Manipulation,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`Count 1); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing) Count 5
`(Alternative Bid-Rigging,
`
`Nestlé USA,
`Inc.
`
`ECF 2264
`
`Fieldale; Pilgrim’s
`Pride; Allen Harim;
`Rabobank
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Foster
`Farms; George’s;
`Harrison; House of
`Raeford; Keystone
`Foods; Koch; Mar-
`Jac; Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`Nestlé Purina
`PetCare
`Company
`
`ECF 2264
`
`Fieldale; Pilgrim’s
`Pride; Allen Harim;
`Rabobank
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Foster
`Farms; George’s;
`Harrison; House of
`Raeford; Keystone
`Foods; Koch; Mar-
`Jac; Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 13 of 598 PageID #:672073
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named
`Co-Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Pled in the Alternative to
`Count 4); Count 6
`(Violation Of 15 U.S.C.
`§ 1 Against Georgia Dock
`Defendants And Bid-
`Rigging Defendants For
`Price-Fixing)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging)
`
`Walmart Inc.
`
`ECF 2260-2 Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Foster
`Farms; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar- Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Wayne
`
`Amick, Peco,
`Pilgrim’s Pride, and
`all other
`individuals/entities
`whose conspiratorial
`conduct is described
`in this Complaint.
`
`Wal-Mart
`Stores East, LP
`
`ECF 2260-2 Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Foster
`Farms; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar- Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Wayne
`
`Amick, Peco,
`Pilgrim’s Pride, and
`all other
`individuals/entities
`whose conspiratorial
`conduct is described
`in this Complaint.
`
`Wal-Mart
`Stores
`Arkansas, LLC
`
`ECF 2260-2 Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Foster
`Farms; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar- Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Wayne
`
`Amick, Peco,
`Pilgrim’s Pride, and
`all other
`individuals/entities
`whose conspiratorial
`conduct is described
`in this Complaint.
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 14 of 598 PageID #:672074
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Wal-Mart
`Stores Texas,
`LLC
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`ECF 2260-2 Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Foster
`Farms; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar- Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Wayne
`
`Named
`Co-Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Amick, Peco,
`Pilgrim’s Pride, and
`all other
`individuals/entities
`whose conspiratorial
`conduct is described
`in this Complaint.
`
`Wal-Mart
`Louisiana, LLC
`
`ECF 2260-2 Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Foster
`Farms; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar- Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Wayne
`
`Amick, Peco,
`Pilgrim’s Pride, and
`all other
`individuals/entities
`whose conspiratorial
`conduct is described
`in this Complaint.
`
`Sam’s West,
`Inc.
`
`ECF 2260-2 Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Foster
`Farms; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar- Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Wayne
`
`Amick, Peco,
`Pilgrim’s Pride, and
`all other
`individuals/entities
`whose conspiratorial
`conduct is described
`in this Complaint.
`
`Sam’s East, Inc. ECF 2260-2 Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Foster
`Farms; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar- Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Wayne
`
`Amick, Peco,
`Pilgrim’s Pride, and
`all other
`individuals/entities
`whose conspiratorial
`conduct is described
`in this Complaint.
`
`14
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act
`Claim for GA Dock
`Manipulation); Count 4
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 15 of 598 PageID #:672075
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named
`Co-Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Allen Harim;
`George’s; Peco
`
`Services Group
`of America,
`Inc.
`
`ECF 2274-1 Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Foster
`Farms; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Keystone Foods;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`Restaurants of
`America, Inc.
`
`ECF 3068
`
`Allen Harim; Amick;
`Keystone Foods;
`Pilgrim’s Pride
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`Tyson; Wayne
`
`15
`
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Output Restriction);
`Count 3 (Sherman Act for
`GA Dock Manipulation);
`Count 4 Count 4
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging and Price-
`Fixing); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid-Rigging); Count 6
`(Violation Of 15 U.S.C.
`§ 1 Against Georgia Dock
`Defendants and Bid-
`Rigging Defendants For
`Price-Fixing)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive Conduct)
`[ROA seeks injunctive
`and equitable relief in
`Counts 1, 2, and 3; ROA
`seeks damages except
`against Fieldale in Counts
`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 Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Price Fixing); Count 11
`(Violation of Arizona’s
`Antitrust Act); Count 13
`(Violation of the Minn.
`Antitrust Law); Count 18
`(Unjust Enrichment)
`[Arizona, Minnesota, New
`Mexico]; Count 23
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7682 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 16 of 598 PageID #:672076
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference is
`to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named
`Co-Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`(Violation of New Mexico
`Antitrust Act); Count 24
`(Violation of the Minn.
`Consumer Fraud Act);
`Count 25 (Violation of
`New Mexico Unfair
`Practices Act)
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive Conduct)
`[LTP seeks injunctive and
`equitable relief only in
`Counts 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 Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Price Fixing); Count 10
`(Violation of FDUTPA);
`Count 18 (Unjust
`Enrichment) [Florida]
`Count 1 (Sherman Act
`Claim for all
`Anticompetitive Conduct)
`[GGW seeks injunctive
`and equ

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket