FTC case challenging $4 billion mattress merger draws veteran antitrust lawyers
By Mike Scarcella
July 3 (Reuters) -A closely-watched lawsuit seeking to block Tempur Sealy’s $4.3 billion acquisition of retail giant Mattress Firm will pit veteran antitrust defenders against a U.S. Federal Trade Commission team led by a former longtime Latham & Watkins attorney who joined the agency this year.
Bed manufacturer Tempur Sealy TPX.N has turned to Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, including partner Bruce Hoffman, and Mattress Firm is working with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, whose team includes Sara Razi, co-leader of the firm’s antitrust and trade regulation group, court records show.
The FTC on Tuesday sued in Houston federal court to stop Tempur Sealy’s merger, which the agency said would lead to potential job losses for manufacturing workers and cause consumers to pay higher prices.
The FTC’s Allyson Maltas, who left Latham in January for a senior trial counsel post at the agency, is in charge of the agency’s case.
Maltas, Hoffman and Razi had no immediate comment or did not respond to a request for one.
The FTC’s lawsuit stands out as a rare litigated “vertical” merger challenge. U.S. antitrust enforcers have struggled in court to block such mergers, since the deals involve companies that do not compete against each other head-on.
FTC competition bureau director Henry Liu said in a statement on Tuesday that Tempur Sealy's aim was “to kneecap competitors and dominate the market.”
Lexington, Kentucky-based Tempur Sealy in a statement said the bedding industry was highly competitive and that Mattress Firm accounted for only a fraction of the retail market.
Cleary Gottlieb’s Hoffman served as FTC competition bureau director from 2017 until 2019, supervising antitrust enforcement. In 2012 while at another firm, Hoffman was counsel to Universal Music Group in its $1.9 billion acquisition of EMI Music's recorded music business.
Razi was on the Simpson Thacher team that successfully defended Change Healthcare in a Justice Department antitrust lawsuit in 2022 targeting UnitedHealth’s acquisition of the company as unlawful.
Maltas was on the Latham team defending American Airlines in a Justice Department antitrust action in Massachusetts before leaving the firm.
Tempur Sealy said it anticipated successfully resolving the litigation in the coming months and completing its deal later this year or in early 2025.
The case is Federal Trade Commission v. Tempur Sealy International Inc. et al, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, No. 4:24-cv-02508.
Read more:
US legal team in Live Nation lawsuit includes veteran plaintiffs' attorney
Amazon has deep bench of defense lawyers to fight US FTC lawsuit
Reporting by Mike Scarcella
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
