Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Cemex approval paves way for next Rinker move
Breaking Legal News | 2007/04/05 18:27

The Department of Justice announced today that it has reached a settlement that will require Mexico-based Cemex S.A.B. de C.V. to divest 39 ready mix concrete, concrete block, and aggregate facilities in Arizona and Florida in the event Cemex succeeds in its hostile takeover of Australia-based Rinker Group. The Department said that without the divestitures the proposed acquisition would substantially lessen competition for ready mix concrete in certain metropolitan areas in Arizona and Florida, as well as result in increased prices for ready mix concrete, concrete block, and aggregate sold to customers handling state Department of Transportation and large building projects. The total value of the Cemex/Rinker transaction, including Rinker's debt, is approximately $12 billion.

The Department's Antitrust Division filed a civil antitrust lawsuit today in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. to block the proposed transaction. At the same time, the Department filed a proposed consent decree that, if approved by the court, would resolve the lawsuit and the Department's competitive concerns.

"Without the divestitures required by the Department, purchasers of ready mix concrete, concrete block and aggregate in these areas of Florida and Arizona, including state departments of transportation, would likely have faced higher prices if the transaction is completed. The Department's action will ensure that these customers will continue to receive the benefits of competition,"said Thomas O. Barnett, Assistant Attorney General for the Department's Antitrust Division.

Ready mix concrete is a building material used in large construction projects including buildings, highways, bridges, tunnels, and other projects. Concrete block is a building material used in the construction of residential and commercial structures. Aggregate is crushed stone and gravel produced at quarries, mines, or gravel pits that is used in, among other things, the production of ready mix concrete, concrete block, and asphalt.

The Department concluded that the deal would have resulted in increased prices for ready mix concrete sold to customers handling state Department of Transportation projects and other large building projects in the metropolitan areas of Fort Walton Beach/Panama City/Pensacola, Jacksonville, Orlando, Tampa/St. Petersburg, and Fort Myers/Naples, Fla., and the areas of Flagstaff and Tucson, Ariz. In Flagstaff, Rinker and Cemex are the only two competitors capable of supplying ready mix concrete for these large projects, and in the other areas in which divestitures are being required there are only one or two firms in addition to Cemex and Rinker that are capable of serving large projects.

The Department also said that the acquisition also would have resulted in an increase in prices for concrete block for a significant number of customers in the metropolitan areas of Tampa/St. Petersburg and Fort Myers/Naples, Fla., where Cemex and Rinker account for more than 60 percent of concrete block sales.

Finally, the Department said that the acquisition would have resulted in increased prices for aggregate to a significant number of customers in the Tucson, Ariz., area where Cemex and Rinker are among a small number of firms capable of supplying aggregates meeting state Department of Transportation specifications.

On Oct. 27, 2006, Cemex announced its intention to acquire Rinker through a hostile cash tender offer. The offer was due to expire on March 30, 2007, but Cemex extended it until April 27, 2007.

Under the terms of the proposed consent decree, once Cemex obtains control of Rinker, Cemex must divest certain ready mix concrete assets to a single buyer in each of the areas of competitive concern. The terms of the proposed consent decree also require the divestiture of all of Rinker's concrete block-related assets in the Tampa/St. Petersburg and Fort Myers/Naples areas. Cemex must divest two aggregate plants in the Tucson, Ariz., area to the same acquirer that purchases the two ready mix plants to be divested at the same locations. Under the consent decree, the Department's Antitrust Division must approve the buyer of all of the divested assets.

Cemex, headquartered in Nuevo León, Mexico, produces and distributes cement, ready mix concrete, aggregate, concrete block, concrete pipe, and related building materials to customers in more than 50 countries. In 2006, Cemex reported total sales of approximately $24.6 billion. Cemex is the largest United States supplier of ready mix concrete and cement and the seventh largest United States supplier of aggregate. Approximately 25 percent of Cemex's revenues are earned in the U.S. Cemex operates in the U.S. through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Cemex Inc., which is headquartered in Houston.

Rinker, headquartered in Chatswood, Australia, produces and distributes aggregate, ready mix concrete, cement, concrete block, asphalt, concrete pipe, and other construction materials through its operations in the U.S. and Australia. In 2006, Rinker reported total sales of approximately $4 billion. Rinker is the second largest U.S. supplier of ready mix concrete and the fifth largest U.S. supplier of aggregate. Approximately 80 percent of Rinker's revenues are earned in the U.S. Rinker operates in the U.S. through its subsidiary, Rinker Materials Corporation, which is headquartered in West Palm Beach, Fla.

As required by the Tunney Act, the proposed consent decree, along with the Department's competitive impact statement, will be published in the Federal Register. Any person may submit written comments concerning the proposed decree during a 60-day comment period to Maribeth Petrizzi, Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 1401 H Street, N.W., Suite 3000, Washington, D.C. 20530. At the conclusion of the 60-day comment period, the court may enter the final judgment upon a finding that it serves the public interest.



[PREV] [1] ..[7228][7229][7230][7231][7232][7233][7234][7235][7236].. [8241] [NEXT]
All
Class Action
Bankruptcy
Biotech
Breaking Legal News
Business
Corporate Governance
Court Watch
Criminal Law
Health Care
Human Rights
Insurance
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Law Center
Law Promo News
Legal Business
Legal Marketing
Litigation
Medical Malpractice
Mergers & Acquisitions
Political and Legal
Politics
Practice Focuses
Securities
Elite Lawyers
Tax
Featured Law Firms
Tort Reform
Venture Business News
World Business News
Law Firm News
Attorneys in the News
Events and Seminars
Environmental
Legal Careers News
Patent Law
Consumer Rights
International
Legal Spotlight
Current Cases
State Class Actions
Federal Class Actions
Abortion consumes US politic..
Trump faces prospect of addi..
Retrial of Harvey Weinstein ..
Starbucks appears likely to ..
Supreme Court will weigh ban..
Judge in Trump case orders m..
Court makes it easier to sue..
Top Europe rights court cond..
Elon Musk will be investigat..
Retired Supreme Court Justic..
The Man Charged in an Illino..
Texas’ migrant arrest law w..
Former Georgia insurance com..
Alabama woman who faked kidn..
A Supreme Court ruling in a ..


Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet.
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Legal Document Services in Los Angeles, CA
Best Legal Document Preparation
www.tllsg.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
East Greenwich Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
www.jantonfamilylaw.com/about
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
  Law Firm Directory
 
 
 
© ClassActionTimes.com. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Class Action Times as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Affordable Law Firm Web Design