Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

United Phosphorus, Ltd. v. Angus Chem. Co.

United Phosphorus, Ltd. v. Angus Chem. Co.

United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

February 16, 2001, Decided

Case No. 94 C 2078

Opinion

 [*1006] MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Before the court are Defendants' motion(s) to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.12(b)(1)) as to Counts I and II of the second amended complaint.

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs [**2]  are (a) an Indian chemical manufacturer called United Phosphorus, Ltd. ("UPL"), (b) an Indian company entitled Shroff's United Chemicals Ltd. ("SUCL") (Shroff Dep. 25), ("the Indian Plaintiffs") and (c) an American firm, J.C. Miller & Associates ("JCM"), which once had an interest in a joint venture that wanted to sell technology to the Indian Plaintiffs. Defendants are (a) Angus Chemical Corporation and its corporate officers, Freeman Hughes, Ollie Chandler, Lowell Pals, Gary W. Granzow (collectively "Angus"), (b) Angus Chemie GmbH ("Chemie"), and (c) Lupin Laboratories, Ltd. and its officer and owner D.B. Gupta (collectively "Lupin"). Counts I and II of the second amended complaint, essentially, allege that Defendants attempted to monopolize, monopolized and conspired to monopolize the market for certain chemicals in violation of § 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. 15 U.S.C. § 2.

Defendants threshold argument is that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction under the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act ("FTAIA"), which limits application of the Sherman Act to conduct with a "direct, substantial, and reasonably foreseeable effect" on domestic commerce [**3]  . 15 U.S.C. § 6a. [*1007]  BACKGROUND FACTS

The following was expressed by the District Court in ruling on a motion under the original complaint herein:

India currently has the greatest incidence of tuberculosis in the world. The primary pharmaceutical drug used in India to cure this potentially fatal illness is Ethambutol. Two chemicals, 2-Amino-1 Butanol ("AB"), the key ingredient of Ethambutol, and 1-Nitro-Propane ("1-NP"), the raw material used to make AB, are the subjects of this litigation.

To make Ethambutol, Indian chemical laboratories, including Defendant Lupin, use AB, which they buy from Defendant Chemie, currently the world's only manufacturer of AB. Chemie, a German subsidiary wholly owned by Defendant Angus, uses 1-NP as raw material to manufacture AB at its plant in Germany. Angus, a Delaware Corporation in the business of manufacturing and selling chemical products, makes 1-NP at a plant in Sterlington, Louisiana, and is presently the world's only manufacturer of 1- NP. Mem. Op. & Order, [United Phosphorus Ltd. v. Angus Chem. Co., 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14786,] 1994 WL 577246, *1 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 18, 1994).

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

131 F. Supp. 2d 1003 *; 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1578 **; 2001-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) P73,336

UNITED PHOSPHORUS, LTD., an Indian corporation; SHROFF'S UNITED CHEMICALS, LTD., an Indian corporation; and J.C. MILLER & ASSOCIATES, INC., an Illinois corporation, Plaintiffs, v. ANGUS CHEMICAL COMPANY, a Delaware corporation; ANGUS CHEMIE GmbH, a German corporation; the ESTATE of FREEMAN HUGHES through its representative Yvonne Hughes; OLLIE W. CHANDLER; LOWELL PALS; GARY W. GRANZOW; D.B. GUPTA; and LUPIN LABORATORIES, LTD., an Indian corporation, Defendants.

Subsequent History: Affirmed by United Phosphorus v. Angus Chem. Co., 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 4088 (7th Cir. Ill., Mar. 10, 2003)

Prior History: United Phosphorus Ltd. v. Angus Chem. Co., 43 F. Supp. 2d 904, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4594 (N.D. Ill., 1999)

Disposition:  [**1]  Defendants' motion to dismiss Counts I and II of the second amended complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction granted.

CORE TERMS

manufacture, chemicals, domestic, commerce, ethambutol, Sherman Act, nitroparaffins, technology, sales, reasonably foreseeable, antitrust, import, anti trust law, plans, domestic commerce, effects, subject matter jurisdiction, export, demonstrates, antitrust claim, supplier, derivatives, bronopol, anticompetitive, Defendants', products, plant, customers, markets, abroad

Antitrust & Trade Law, International Aspects, International Application of US Law, General Overview, International Trade Law, Sherman Act, Civil Procedure, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Jurisdiction Over Actions, Scope, Monopolization Offenses, Regulated Practices, Monopolies & Monopolization, Attempts to Monopolize, Sherman Act, International Law, Authority to Regulate, Jurisdiction, Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act, Anticompetitive Activities, Business & Corporate Law, Foreign Corporations, Business & Corporate Compliance, Transportation Law, Interstate Commerce, Restraints of Trade, International Commerce & Trade, Exports & Imports, Pleading & Practice, Pleadings, Rule Application & Interpretation, Evidence, Types of Evidence, Judicial Admissions, Pleadings, Exemptions & Immunities, Governments, Legislation, Interpretation