Skip to main content

Displaying 141 - 160 of 220

Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc.

On 4/20/2011, the FTC challenged Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc.’s (Phoebe’s) proposed acquisition of rival Palmyra Park Hospital, Inc. (Palmyra) from HCA, in Albany, Georgia. The FTC’s administrative complaint alleges that the deal will reduce competition significantly and allow the combined Phoebe/Palmyra to raise prices for general acute-care hospital services charged to commercial health plans, substantially harming patients and local employers and employees. The FTC also alleges that Phoebe has structured the deal in a way that uses the Hospital Authority of Albany-Dougherty County (the Authority) in an attempt to shield the anticompetitive acquisition from federal antitrust scrutiny under the “state action” doctrine. The FTC’s staff, together with the Attorney General of the State of Georgia, filed a separate complaint in federal district court in Albany, Georgia, seeking an order to halt any transaction involving Phoebe, the Authority, or Palmyra, under which Phoebe would acquire control of Palmyra’s operations, until the conclusion of the FTC’s administrative proceeding and any subsequent appeals. On 2/19/2013, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remanded further proceedings.  On June 27, 2011, the district court denied the motion for a preliminary injunction on the grounds that the transaction was protected by the state action doctrine.  On December 14, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed.  In February 2013, the Supreme Court reversed, finding that the state of Georgia had not clearly articulated a policy that would permit the Hospital Authority to approve anticompetitive mergers.

On 3/14/2013, the Commission issued an order granting complaint counsels motion to lift the stay on administrative proceedings. On 4/9/2013, an amended complaint and renewed motions for a PI and TRO were filed in federal district court in Georgia, pending an 8/5/2013 administrative trial. On 5/15/2013, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia granted the FTC’s motion for a temporary restraining order. On 6/25/2013, the Commission granted the motion to withdraw the matter from Part III, and accepted for public comment a proposed settlement of its charges. Due to the unique circumstances of the Certificate of Need (CON) laws in Georgia, the Commission originally believed it was unable to require that the hospitals become independent competitors. On 9/5/2014, based on public comments received, as well as other information, the Commission determined that Georgia’s CON laws may not preclude structural relief, and voted to withdraw its acceptance of the proposed consent agreement and return the matter to administrative litigation. On 3/31/15, the FTC entered into a settlement agreement requiring Phoebe Putney and the Hospital Authority must notify the FTC in advance of acquiring any part of a hospital or a controlling interest in other healthcare providers in the Albany, Georgia area for the next 10 years, and prohibiting them from objecting to regulatory applications made by potential new hospital providers in the same area for up to five years. The settlement is similar to the one proposed in 2013 and does not require structural relief.

Type of Action
Federal
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
111 0067

Universal Health Services and Alan B. Miller

The FTC required hospital management company Universal Health Services, Inc. to sell an acute inpatient psychiatric facility in the El Paso, Texas/Santa Teresa, New Mexico area to settle charges that UHS’s proposed acquisition of Ascend Health Corporation would be anticompetitive. As proposed, the deal allegedly would lead to a virtual monopoly in the provision of acute inpatient psychiatric services to commercially insured patients in the El Paso/Santa Teresa area.  The FTC's final order requires UHS to sell its Peak Behavioral Health Services facility within six months to an FTC-approved buyer. In addition, to ensure that the Peak assets are able to attract a buyer that can effectively compete with UHS after the sale, the proposed order allows the Commission to require a second UHS hospital, Mesilla Valley Hospital in Las Cruces, New Mexico, to be sold together with Peak if Peak alone is not divested to an approved buyer within six months.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
1210157
Docket Number
C-4372

Reading Health System, and Surgical Institute of Reading, In the Matter of

The FTC issued an administrative complaint against Reading Health System’s proposed acquisition of Surgical Institute of Reading L.P., alleging that the combination of the two health care providers would substantially reduce competition in the area surrounding Reading, Pennsylvania. The FTC also authorized staff, in conjunction with the Pennsylvania Attorney General, to seek a preliminary injunction in federal district court or other relief necessary to stop the deal pending a full administrative trial. After the parties abandoned the transaction, on 12/7/2012, the FTC formally dismissed the administrative complaint.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
1210155
Docket Number
9353

Renown Health, In the Matter of

Renown Health agreed to settle charges that its acquisitions of two local cardiology groups reduced competition for the provision of adult cardiology services in the Reno area. Renown Health, based in Reno, Nevada, operates general acute care hospitals and commercial health plans serving the Reno area. Before the acquisitions, virtually all of the cardiologists in the Reno area were affiliated with two medical groups – Sierra Nevada Cardiology Associates and Reno Heart Physicians.To settle the charges, Renown Health will release its staff cardiologists from "non-compete" contract clauses, allowing up to 10 of them to join competing cardiology practices.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
1110101