Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 1 of 608 PageID #:672659
`
`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
`
`THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
`
`Magistrate Judge Jeffrey T. Gilbert
`
`All Track 2 Direct Action Plaintiffs
`
`PUBLIC REDACTED VERSION
`
`SANDERSON FARMS’ ANSWER TO
`TRACK 2 DIRECT ACTION PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED
`CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 2 of 608 PageID #:672660
`
`Defendants Sanderson Farms, LLC (f/k/a Sanderson Farms, Inc.), Sanderson Farms Foods,
`
`LLC (f/k/a Sanderson Farms, Inc. (Foods Division)), Sanderson Farms Production, LLC (f/k/a
`
`Sanderson Farms, Inc. (Production Division)), and Sanderson Farms Processing, LLC (f/k/a
`
`Sanderson Farms, Inc. (Processing Division)) (collectively “Sanderson Farms”) hereby answer and
`
`set forth their 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: Sanderson 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
`
`1 Sanderson 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, Sanderson Farms denies all factual allegations contained in Plaintiffs’ headers and
`introductory clauses to complaint paragraphs.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 3 of 608 PageID #:672661
`
`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
`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, Sanderson Farms denies all
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 4 of 608 PageID #:672662
`
`allegations in the Introduction, including those in the accompanying Footnotes.
`
`II.
`
`CHART OF DIRECT ACTION PLAINTIFF CASES
`
`
`
`
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference
`is to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`ECF 4807;
`4808
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Sysco
`Corporati
`on
`
`US Foods, Inc. ECF 4809;
`4810
`
`Jetro
`Holdings,
`LLC
`
`ECF 2130
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Fieldale;
`George’s; Peco;
`Rabobank5
`
`George’s;
`Peco; Tyson;
`Keystone;
`Rabobank6
`
`Allen Harim;
`Keystone
`Foods; Amick
`
`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)
`
`Named
`Defendants (Not
`Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`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
`
`4
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 5 of 608 PageID #:672663
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference
`is to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`ECF 2100
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Ahold
`Delhaize
`USA, Inc.
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Amick; Tyson
`
`Named
`Defendants (Not
`Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Agri Stats; Case;
`Claxton; Fieldale;
`Foster Farms;
`George’s;
`Harrison; House of
`Raeford; Keystone
`Foods; Koch; Mar-
`Jac; Mountaire;
`O.K. Foods; Peco;
`Perdue; Pilgrim’s
`Pride; Sanderson;
`Simmons; Wayne
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act,
`for all Anticompetitive
`Conduct); Count 2
`(Sherman Act, for
`Output Restriction, Pled
`in the Alternative);
`Count 3 (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)
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 6 of 608 PageID #:672664
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference
`is to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`ECF 2125
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`BJ’s
`Wholesale
`Club, Inc.
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Allen Harim;
`Keystone
`Foods; Amick
`
`Named
`Defendants (Not
`Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`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
`
`Maximum
`Quality
`Foods, Inc.
`
`ECF 2134
`
`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
`
`United
`Supermarket
`s, LLC
`
`ECF 2115
`
`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
`
`
`
`6
`
`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 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
`Manipulation); Count 5
`(Sherman Act Claim for
`Bid Rigging); Count 6
`(Sherman Act
`Claim for Price Fixing)
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 7 of 608 PageID #:672665
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference
`is to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`ECF 2115
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Krispy
`Krunchy
`Foods, LLC
`
`Cheney
`Bros., Inc.
`
`ECF 2115
`
`ECF 2110
`
`Shamro
`ck
`Foods
`Compan
`y
`
`Named
`Defendants (Not
`Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`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; Koch;
`Mar-Jac; Marshall
`Durbin; Mountaire;
`O.K. Foods; Peco;
`Perdue; Pilgrim’s
`Pride; Sanderson;
`Simmons; Tyson;
`Wayne; Keystone
`Foods
`
`
`
`7
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Allen Harim;
`Amick; Keystone
`Foods; Pilgrim’s
`Pride
`
`Allen Harim;
`Amick; Keystone
`Foods; Pilgrim’s
`Pride
`
`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)
`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
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 8 of 608 PageID #:672666
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference
`is to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Named
`Defendants (Not
`Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`For Price- Fixing)
`
`ECF 2110
`
`United
`Food
`Service,
`Inc.
`
`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
`
`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)
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 9 of 608 PageID #:672667
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Allen Harim
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Quirch
`Foods, LLC,
`f/k/a Quirch
`Foods Co.
`
`Named
`Defendants (Not
`Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference
`is to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`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
`
`ECF 2135
`
`Sherwood
`Food
`Distributors,
`L.L.C.
`
`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
`
`Causes of Action
`
`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)
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 10 of 608 PageID #:672668
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference
`is to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`ECF 2135
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Harvest
`Meat
`Company,
`Inc.
`
`ECF 2135
`
`Western
`Boxed Meat
`Distributors,
`Inc.
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Allen Harim;
`Keystone
`Foods; Amick
`
`Allen Harim;
`Keystone
`Foods; Amick
`
`Named
`Defendants (Not
`Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`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
`
`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 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)
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 11 of 608 PageID #:672669
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference
`is to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`ECF 2135
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Hamilton
`Meat, LLC
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Allen Harim;
`Keystone
`Foods; Amick
`
`Named
`Defendants (Not
`Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`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; Allen
`Harim; Amick;
`Case; Claxton;
`Fieldale; Foster
`Farms; George’s;
`Harrison;
`Keystone Foods;
`Koch; Mountaire;
`O.K. Foods; Peco;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson;
`Simmons; Wayne
`
`Allen Harim;
`Keystone
`Foods; Amick
`
`Hooters of
`America,
`LLC
`
`ECF 2109
`
`House of
`Raeford; Mar-
`Jac; Perdue;
`Tyson
`
`Darden
`Restaurant
`s, Inc.
`
`ECF 2126
`
`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
`
`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 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 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)
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 12 of 608 PageID #:672670
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference
`is to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`ECF 2113
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Checkers
`Drive-In
`Restauran
`ts, Inc.
`
`Conagra
`Brands,
`Inc.
`
`ECF 2264
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Allen Harim;
`Amick; Keystone;
`Pilgrim’s Pride
`
`Pilgrim’s
`Pride; Allen
`Harim;
`Rabobank
`
`Named
`Defendants (Not
`Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`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
`
`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 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
`(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)
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 13 of 608 PageID #:672671
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference
`is to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`ECF 2264
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Pinnacle
`Foods, Inc.
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Fieldale;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Allen Harim;
`Rabobank
`
`Named
`Defendants (Not
`Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`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
`
`ECF 2264
`
`Kraft
`Heinz
`Foods
`Company
`
`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
`
`Causes of Action
`
`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, 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)
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 14 of 608 PageID #:672672
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference
`is to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`ECF 2264
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Nestlé
`USA, Inc.
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Fieldale;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Allen Harim;
`Rabobank
`
`Named
`Defendants (Not
`Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`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
`
`ECF 2264
`
`Nestlé
`Purina
`PetCare
`Company
`
`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
`
`Causes of Action
`
`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, 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)
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 15 of 608 PageID #:672673
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Walmart Inc.
`
`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/entitie
`s 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/entitie
`s 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/entitie
`s whose
`conspiratorial
`conduct is
`described in this
`Complaint.
`
`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)
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 16 of 608 PageID #:672674
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Wal-Mart
`Stores
`Texas, LLC
`
`Wal-Mart
`Louisiana,
`LLC
`
`Sam’s
`West, Inc.
`
`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/entitie
`s whose
`conspiratorial
`conduct is
`described in this
`Complaint.
`
`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/entitie
`s whose
`conspiratorial
`conduct is
`described in this
`Complaint.
`
`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/entitie
`s whose
`conspiratorial
`conduct is
`described in this
`Complaint.
`
`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)
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 17 of 608 PageID #:672675
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Amick, Peco,
`Pilgrim’s Pride,
`and all other
`individuals/entitie
`s whose
`conspiratorial
`conduct is
`described in this
`Complaint.
`
`Allen Harim;
`George’s;
`Peco
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Sam’s East,
`Inc.
`
`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
`
`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
`
`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
`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)
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`

`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7683 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 18 of 608 PageID #:672676
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Reference
`is to Sealed
`Version, if
`applicable)
`ECF 3068
`
`Plaintiff
`Name
`
`Restaurants
`of America,
`Inc.
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators
`(if any)
`
`Allen Harim;
`Amick; Keystone
`Foods; Pilgrim’s
`Pride
`
`Named
`Defendants (Not
`Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`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
`
`Causes of Action
`
`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
`