Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 1 of 683 PageID #:674687
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`EASTERN DIVISION
`
`
`
` Civil Action No. 1:16-cv-08637
`
`
`
`IN RE BROILER CHICKEN ANTITRUST Hon. Judge Thomas M. Durkin
`
`LITIGATION
`
`
`
`
`
`THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
`
` Magistrate Judge Jeffrey T. Gilbert
`
`
`
`
`
`All Track 2 Direct Action Plaintiffs
`
` PUBLIC REDACTED VERSION
`
`THE MOUNTAIRE DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER AND DEFENSES TO TRACK 2 DIRECT
`ACTION PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`Defendants Mountaire Farms Inc., Mountaire Farms, LLC, and Mountaire Farms of
`
`Delaware, Inc. (hereinafter collectively, “Mountaire”) hereby submit their answer and affirmative
`
`defenses to the Track 2 Direct Action Plaintiffs’ (“Plaintiffs”) Second Amended Consolidated
`
`Complaint (“Complaint”) (ECF No. 5456), filed on February 28, 2022, and any subsequently filed
`
`joinders thereto, as follows:
`
`PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
`
`Mountaire denies all allegations in the Complaint unless it has expressly admitted those
`
`allegations herein. Where an allegation in the Complaint is directed at another Defendant or a party
`
`that is not affiliated with Mountaire, except as otherwise expressly stated, Mountaire denies the
`
`allegations set forth in the Complaint on the basis that it denies the knowledge or information
`
`sufficient to form a belief concerning the truth of such allegations. Further, unless otherwise
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 2 of 683 PageID #:674688
`
`
`
`
`
`expressly admitted, Mountaire denies any allegations in the headings, footnotes, or in other places in
`
`the Complaint, to the extent any such allegations require a response. Any headings, subheadings or
`
`similar text that Mountaire has reprinted in this Answer are for the convenience of the Court and the
`
`parties and are not intended to be nor shall they be construed as an admission of any fact by
`
`Mountaire.
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`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
`
`
`1Given 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.
`
`2DAPs objected to filing a consolidated complaint [ECF No. 3625, 4695], and maintain those objections for all
`purposes, including any appeals.
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 3 of 683 PageID #:674689
`
`
`
`
`
`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 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.
`
`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
`
`
`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.
`
` 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).
`4
`
`
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 4 of 683 PageID #:674690
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686Filed: 04/25/25 Page 4 of 683 PagelD #:674690
`
`propriety of those orders. To the extent a response is required, Mountaire deniesall allegations in the
`
`Introduction, including those in the accompanying Footnotes.
`
`I.
`
`CHART OF DIRECT ACTION PLAINTIFF CASES
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Referenceis to
`Sealed Version,if
`applicable)
`
`Named Defendants
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Named Co-
`Conspirators (if
`any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Sysco Corporation|ECF 4807;
`
`3
`
`laxton; Foster Farms;
`on; House of
`
`|Ge
`
`:
`*s;
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
` ffor all Anticompetitive
`
`;
`
`‘yson; Keystone;
`
`S Foods,Inc.
`
`|ECF 4809;
`4810
`
`i
`
`:
`
`Fi
`
`;
`
`:
`
`;
`
`eorge’s; Peco;
`
`> Claims against the Rabobank Defendants were dismissed with prejudice. [ECF No. 5429]. A motion for entry of
`judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) has been filed. [ECF No. 5441].
`
`® Claims against the Rabobank Defendants were dismissed with prejudice. [ECF No. 5429]. A motion for entry of
`judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) has been filed. [ECF No. 5441].
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 5 of 683 PageID #:674691
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 5 of 683 PagelD #:674691
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`Manipulation)
`
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford:
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Pilgrim’s Pride;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`
`etro Holdings,
`LLC
`
`[ECF 2130
`
`gri Stats; Case;
`laxton; Fieldale;
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging and Price-Fixing):
`ount 5 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 6 of 683 PageID #:674692
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 6 of 683 PagelD #:674692
`
`gri Stats; Case:
`laxton: Fieldale;
`
`Amick; Tyson
`
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Keystone Foods;
`Koch: Mar-Jac:
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods: Peco: Perdue;
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act,forall]
`Anticompetitive Conduct):
`ount 2 (Sherman Act, for
`Output Restriction, Pled in
`e Alternative); Count 3
`Sherman Act, for Georgia
`IDock Price-Fixing, Pled in
`e Alternative); Count 4
`Sherman Act, for Bid-
`
`led in the Alternative):
`ount 5 (Sherman Act, for
`
`Alternative); Count 7 (GA
`CO Based on 16-14- 4(a));
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Referenceis to
`Sealed Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Plaintiff Name
`
`Ahold Delhaize
`
`Named Defendants
`
`Named Co-
`
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Conspirators (if
`any)
`
`Causes of Action
`
`IDock Defendants)
`
`(Federal RICO); Count 19
`Common Law Fraud Agains
`he GA Dock Defendants):
`ount 20 (Breach of the
`ovenant of Good Faith and
`Fair Dealing Against the GA
`IDock Defendants); Count 21
`egligent Misrepresentation,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`ount 19); Count 22 (Unjust
`Enrichment Against the GA
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 7 of 683 PageID #:674693
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 7 of 683 PagelD #:674693
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causesof Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`BJ's Wholesale
`
`JECF 2125
`
`Maximum Quality[ECF 2134
`
`laim for Price Fixing)
`
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods: Peco: Perdue:
`Sanderson; Simmons:
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging and Price-Fixing):
`
`ount 5 (hermanAct Claim
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging, GA Dock
`Manipulation)
`
`(Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`
`A gri Stats; Case:
`laxton; Fieldale;
`
`A
`Amick;
`
`im;
`
`i
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 8 of 683 PageID #:674694
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686Filed: 04/25/25 Page 8 of 683 PagelD #:674694
`
`Plaintiff Name
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`(Referenceis to
`Sealed Version, if
`applicable)
`
`Named Defendants
`
`Named Co-
`
`(Not Previously
`Dismissed)
`
`Conspirators (if
`
`Causes of Action
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid
`igging):
`ount 6 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac:
`IMountaire; O.K.
`Foods: Peco: Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`
`S.C. § 1 Against Georgia
`
`Shamrock Foods
`ompany
`
`IECF 2110
`
`eystone Foods
`
`led in the Alternative to
`
`‘ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`S.C. § 1 Against Bid-
`igging Defendants for Bid-
`igging and Price- Fixing):
`‘ount 6 (Violation Of 15
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 9 of 683 PageID #:674695
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 9 of 683 PagelD #:674695
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`gri Stats; Case;
`laxton; Fieldale;
`
`i
`
`im;
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`Alternative)
`
`-S.C. § 1 Against Bid-
`igging Defendants for Bid-
`igging and Price- Fixing);
`ount 6 (Violation Of 15
`S.C. § 1 Against Georgia
`
`Alternative to Count 1);
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`led in the Alternative to
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`1
`
`gri Stats; Claxton;
`ieldale; Foster Farms;
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`
`Fixing, Pled in the
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 10 of 683 PageID #:674696
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 10 of 683 PagelD #:674696
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`Harvest Meat
`
`Manipulation)
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging and Price-Fixing):
`ount 5 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging, GA Dock
`Manipulation)
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 11 of 683 PageID #:674697
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 11 of 683 PagelD #:674697
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causesof Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`Hamilton Meat,
`
`[ECF 2135
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging and Price-Fixing):
`ount 5 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`Manipulation)
`
`America, LLC
`
`House of Raeford;
`IMar-Jac; Perdue:
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging and Price-Fixing):
`ount 5 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 12 of 683 PageID #:674698
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 12 of 683 PagelD #:674698
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`gri Stats; Case:
`laxton: Fieldale;
`
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac:
`IMountaire; O.K.
`Foods: Peco: Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`
`ount 4); Count 6
`
`onagra Brands,
`Inc.
`
`JECF 2264
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid
`igging): Count 6 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Price Fixing):
`ount 10 (Violation of
`
`land Price-Fixing) Count 5
`Alternative Bid-Rigging,
`led in the Alternative to
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 13 of 683 PageID #:674699
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 13 of 683 PagelD #:674699
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Dismissed)
`Sealed Version, if
`applicable)
`
`
`
`Alternative to Count 1);
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`ffor GA Dock Manipulation,
`led in the Alternative to
`ount 1); Count 4 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging
`land Price-Fixing) Count 5
`Alternative Bid-Rigging,
`led in the Alternative to
`ount 4); Count 6
`
`efendants For Price-Fixing)
`
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`ouse of Raeford;
`eystone Foods;
`och; Mar-Jac:
`
`gri Stats; Case:
`
`14
`
`efendants And Bid- Rigging
`efendants For Price-Fixing)
`
`Alternative to Count 1);
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`for GA Dock Manipulation,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`ount 1); Count 4 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging
`land Price-Fixing) Count 5
`Alternative Bid-Rigging,
`
`Against Georgia Dock
`efendants And Bid- Rigging
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 14 of 683 PageID #:674700
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 14 of 683 PagelD #:674700
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Dismissed)
`Sealed Version, if
`applicable)
`
`
`
`INestlé USA,Inc.
`
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`ouse of Raeford;
`eystone Foods;
`och; Mar-Jac:
`
`Alternative to Count 1);
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`ffor GA Dock Manipulation,
`led in the Alternative to
`ount 1); Count 4 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging
`land Price-Fixing) Count 5
`Alternative Bid-Rigging,
`led in the Alternative to
`ount 4); Count 6
`
`efendants For Price-Fixing)
`
`efendants And Bid- Rigging
`efendants For Price-Fixing)
`
`Alternative to Count 1);
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`for GA Dock Manipulation,
`Pled in the Alternative to
`ount 1); Count 4 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging
`land Price-Fixing) Count 5
`Alternative Bid-Rigging,
`
`Against Georgia Dock
`efendants And Bid- Rigging
`
`gri Stats; Case:
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 15 of 683 PageID #:674701
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 15 of 683 PagelD #:674701
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`almart Inc
`
`IECF 2260-2
`
`al-Mart Stores
`
`[ECF 2260-2
`
`i
`
`i
`
`;
`
`5
`
`ick,
`
`:
`
`int.
`
`;
`
`5
`
`ick,
`
`:
`
`Foods; Perdue:
`Sanderson; Wayne
`
`i
`
`i
`
`.
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging): Count 5 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging)
`
`
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging): Count 5 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging)
`
`i
`
`i
`
`ick,
`
`.
`
`i
`
`i
`
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging)
`
`IECF 2260-2
`
`i
`
`;
`
`5
`
`Foods: Perdue:
`Sanderson; Wayne
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 16 of 683 PageID #:674702
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 16 of 683 PagelD #:674702
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging)
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging): Count 5 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging)
`
`al-Mart Stores
`
`[ECF 2260-2
`
`exas, LLC
`
`Louisiana, LLC
`
`Sam’s West, Inc.
`
`[ECF 2260-2
`
`Foods: Perdue;
`Sanderson; Wayne
`
`Foods: Perdue;
`Sanderson; Wayne
`
`17
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging); Count 5 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging)
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 17 of 683 PageID #:674703
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 17 of 683 PagelD #:674703
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`Sam’s East,Inc.
`
`[ECF 2260-2
`
`efendants For Price-Fixing)
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`
`Foods; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Wayne
`
`Services Group of JECF 2274-1
`America, Inc.
`
`i
`
`3
`
`:
`
`im;
`
`;|Ge
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging); Count 5 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Bid-Rigging)
`
`Sherman Act for GA Dock
`
`Against Georgia Dock
`efendants and Bid- Rigging
`
`18
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 18 of 683 PageID #:674704
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 18 of 683 PagelD #:674704
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causesof Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`America, Inc.
`
`House of Raeford:
`Koch; Mar-Jac:
`IMountaire; O.K.
`Foods: Peco: Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons:
`
`of FDUTPA); Count 18
`
`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)
`Arizona, Minnesota, New
`
`House of Raeford:
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods; Peco; Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons;
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`only in Counts 1, 2, and 3];
`‘ount 2 (Sherman Act Claim
`for Output Restriction);
`‘ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`for GA Dock Manipulation);
`
`for Bid Rigging); Count 6
`Sherman Act Claim for Price!
`Fixing); Count 10 (Violation
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 19 of 683 PageID #:674705
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 19 of 683 PagelD #:674705
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`[for all Anticompetitive
`
`:
`:
`laxton; Foster Farms;|Amick; Fieldale;
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`{Keystone Foods:
`House of Raeford;
`Pilgrim’s Pride
`Koch; Mar-Jac:
`Mountaire; O.K.
`Foods: Peco: Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons:
`
`inois|
`
`only in Counts 1, 2, and 3];
`ount 2 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`ffor GA Dock Manipulation);
`ount 5 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`General Business Law);
`ount 15 (Violation of the
`inois Fraud Act); Count 18
`njust Enrichment) [Florida,
`
`A gri Stats; Case:
`
`20
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 20 of 683 PageID #:674706
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 20 of 683 PagelD #:674706
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causesof Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`ount 17 (Violation of
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid
`igging); Count 6 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Price Fixing);
`ount 16 (Violation of
`alifornia’s Cartwright Act);
`
`Anaheim Wings,
`
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac:
`IMountaire; O.K.
`Foods: Peco: Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons:
`
`21
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 21 of 683 PageID #:674707
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 21 of 683 PagelD #:674707
`
`Underlying
`Complaint
`Causes of Action
` (Not Previously Conspirators (ifPlaintiff Name|(Reference is to
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`NamedDefendants
`
`Named Co-
`
`ings 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
`
`Oceanside
`
`
`
`Oceanside Wings, ECF 3066
`ILLC, previously
`d/b/a Hooters of
`
`gri Stats; Case:
`
`22
`
`

`

`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causesof Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 22 of 683 PageID #:674708
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 22 of 683 PagelD #:674708
`
`gri Stats; Case:
`
`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
`
`23
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 23 of 683 PageID #:674709
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 23 of 683 PagelD #:674709
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causesof Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`ount 17 (Violation of
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid
`igging); Count 6 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Price Fixing);
`ount 16 (Violation of
`alifornia’s Cartwright Act);
`
`Ontario Wings,
`
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac:
`IMountaire; O.K.
`Foods: Peco: Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons:
`
`24
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 24 of 683 PageID #:674710
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 24 of 683 PagelD #:674710
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causesof Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`ount 17 (Violation of
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid
`igging); Count 6 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Price Fixing);
`ount 16 (Violation of
`alifornia’s Cartwright Act);
`
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac:
`IMountaire; O.K.
`Foods: Peco: Perdue;
`Sanderson; Simmons:
`
`25
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 25 of 683 PageID #:674711
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 25 of 683 PagelD #:674711
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causesof Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`Bonita Plaza
`ings, LLC, d/b/a
`
`ings seeks injunctive and
`equitable relief only in
`
`IDowntown LA
`
`Act Claim for Price Fixing);
`ount 16 (Violation of
`alifornia’s Cartwright Act);
`ount 17 (Violation of
`
`IDowntown WingsJECF 3066
`ILLC, previously
`d/b/a Hooters of
`
`gri Stats; Case:
`
`26
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 26 of 683 PageID #:674712
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 26 of 683 PagelD #:674712
`
`Named Co-
`
`ount 1)
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`estriction, Pled in the
`
`Underlying
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causesof Action
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`
`
`Amigos Meat
`Distributors, LP
`
`Alternative to Count 1);
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`1
`
`Amick; George’s;
`
`1
`
`1
`
`27
`
`Alternative to Count1);
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 27 of 683 PageID #:674713
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 27 of 683 PagelD #:674713
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`IECF 3086-1
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid-
`igging and Price-Fixing):
`ount 5 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`iggingDefendants For
`
`S.C. § 1 Against Bid-
`igging Defendants for Bid-
`igging and Price- Fixing);
`ount 6 (Violation Of 15
`S.C. § 1 Against Georgia
`
`IE] Pollo Loco,
`
`:
`:
`Keystone Foods
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 28 of 683 PageID #:674714
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 28 of 683 PagelD #:674714
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`| ndependent
`
`i
`
`;
`
`Amick;
`
`im;
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`|Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`Keystone Foods;
`Amick, Agri Stats:
`aft Heinz Foods|ECF 3572
`ase; Claxton; Foster [Fieldale Farms_[for all Anticompetitive
`
`
`Fixing, Pled in the
`
`Sherman Act Claim for GA
`Dock Manipulation, Pled in
`he Alternative to Count1);
`ount 5 (Sherman Act Claim
`for Bid-Rigging Pled in the
`Alternative); Count 6
`
`igging Defendants For
`
`Bones, Inc.)
`
`ouse of Raeford;
`och; Mar-Jac:
`arshall Durbin;
`
`eystone Foods
`
`Alternative to Count 1);
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`led in the Alternative to
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`S.C. § 1 Against Bid-
`igging Defendants for Bid-
`igging and Price- Fixing);
`ount 6 (Violation Of 15
`S.C. § 1 Against Georgia
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 29 of 683 PageID #:674715
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 29 of 683 PagelD #:674715
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`gri Stats; Case:
`laxton; Fieldale;
`
`i
`
`im:
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`S.C. § 1 Against Georgia
`
`-S.C. § 1 Against Bid-
`igging Defendants for Bid-
`igging and Price- Fixing);
`ount 6 (Violation Of 15
`S.C. § 1 Against Georgia
`
`Alternative to Count 1);
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`
`Alternative to Count1);
`‘ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`S.C. § 1 Against Bid-
`igging Defendants for Bid-
`igging and Price- Fixing):
`‘ount 6 (Violation Of 15
`
`Keystone Foods
`
`30
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 30 of 683 PageID #:674716
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 30 of 683 PagelD #:674716
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`Boston Market
`orporation
`
`i
`
`:
`
`:
`
`im:
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`
`Alternative to Count 1);
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`-S.C. § 1 Against Bid-
`igging Defendants for Bid-
`igging and Price- Fixing);
`ount 6 (Violation Of 15
`S.C. § 1 Against Georgia
`
`Act Claim for Price Fixing)
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`estriction); Count3
`Sherman Act Claim for GA
`[Dock Manipulation); Count 5
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid
`Rigging); Count 6 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Price Fixing)
`
`he Fresh Market, ECF 3819-1
`
`;
`;
`i
`laxton; Foster Farms;
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford:
`Koch; Mar-Jac;
`Mountaire Farms;
`O.K. Foods; Peco;
`
`i
`
`i
`
`im:
`
`:
`
`Pilgri
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`estriction); Count 3
`Sherman Act Claim for GA
`
`31
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 31 of 683 PageID #:674717
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 31 of 683 PagelD #:674717
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`IECF 3820-1
`
`gri Stats; Case:
`laxton; Foster Farms;
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`House of Raeford;
`Koch; Mar-Jac:
`Mountaire Farms;
`O.K. Foods: Peco:
`
`S.C. § 1 Against Georgia
`
`Sherman Act Claim for Bid
`igging): Count 6 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Price Fixing)
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`for all Anticompetitive
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`
`‘ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`led in the Alternative to
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`S.C. § 1 Against Bid-
`igging Defendants for Bid-
`igging and Price- Fixing):
`‘ount 6 (Violation Of 15
`
`eorge’s; Harrison;
`ouse of Raeford:
`
`:
`Keystone Foods
`
`32
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 32 of 683 PageID #:674718
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 32 of 683 PagelD #:674718
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`aptain D’s LLC JECF 4402
`
`gri Stats; Case:
`laxton: Fieldale;
`
`S.C. § 1 Against Georgia
`
`-S.C. § 1 Against Bid-
`igging Defendants for Bid-
`igging and Price- Fixing);
`ount 6 (Violation Of 15
`S.C. § 1 Against Georgia
`
`Alternative to Count 1);
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`
`Alternative to Count1);
`‘ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`S.C. § 1 Against Bid-
`igging Defendants for Bid-
`igging and Price- Fixing):
`‘ount 6 (Violation Of 15
`
`Distribution, Inc.
`
`IKeystone Foods
`
`33
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 33 of 683 PageID #:674719
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 33 of 683 PagelD #:674719
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`S.C. § 1 Against Georgia
`
`-S.C. § 1 Against Bid-
`igging Defendants for Bid-
`igging and Price- Fixing);
`ount 6 (Violation Of 15
`S.C. § 1 Against Georgia
`
`Alternative to Count 1);
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`onduct); Count 2 (Sherman
`Act Claim for Output
`
`Alternative to Count1);
`‘ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`ount 1); Count 4 (Violation
`
`S.C. § 1 Against Bid-
`igging Defendants for Bid-
`igging and Price- Fixing):
`‘ount 6 (Violation Of 15
`
`34
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 34 of 683 PageID #:674720
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 34 of 683 PagelD #:674720
`
`Underlying
`Named Co-
`Named Defendants
`Complaint
`
`Plaintiff Name|(Reference is to (Not Previously Conspirators (if Causes of Action
`
`Sealed Version, if
`Dismissed)
`applicable)
`
`
`
`IEMA Foods Co.,
`LLC
`
`JECF 1 in 1:20- ev-
`
`IECF1 in 1:20- ev-
`
`laxton; Foster Farms:|A
`on; House of
`
`Alternative to Count I):
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`Alternative to Count I):
`‘ount 6 (Georgia Dock and
`
`Alternative to Count I): :
`ount 3 (Sherman Act Claim
`
`Bid Rigging).
`
`igging; Pled in the
`Alternative to Count I):
`‘ount 6 (Georgia Doc and
`Bid Rigging).
`
`laxton; Foster Farms; |Amick;
`arrison; House of
`
`Fi
`
`Count 1 (Sherman Act Claim
`{for all Anticompetitive
`
`;
`
`Alternative to CountI);
`‘ount 6 (Georgia Doc and
`
`35
`
`

`

`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document #: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 35 of 683 PageID #:674721
`Case: 1:16-cv-08637 Document#: 7686 Filed: 04/25/25 Page 35 of 683 PagelD #:674721
`
`Underlyin