US drops antitrust case over healthcare hiring agreements
Reuters
Published Nov 14, 2023 11:09AM ET
Updated Nov 14, 2023 11:51AM ET
By Mike Scarcella
(Reuters) - The U.S. Justice Department has asked a judge to dismiss the government's prosecution of a UnitedHealth Group (NYSE:UNH) affiliate accused of unlawfully restricting employee mobility, marking a new setback in the government's push to apply criminal antitrust laws to labor markets.
U.S. prosecutors in a filing in Dallas federal court asked U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay (NYSE:LNN) to dismiss charges against Surgical Care Affiliates LLC and a related entity, SCAI Holdings LLC.
Deerfield, Illinois-based Surgical Care operates one of the country's largest ambulatory surgery centers.
Surgical Care Affiliates and SCAI Holdings were charged in 2021 with violating U.S. antitrust law in an alleged conspiracy with industry rivals to not solicit each others' senior-level employees.
The government said dismissal of the case "will allow the conservation of this court's time and resources."
A Justice Department spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Surgical Care Affiliates and UnitedHealth had no immediate comment.
The move comes amid a series of defeats in other closely watched labor-related criminal antitrust cases in federal courts in Texas and elsewhere.
In April, a judge in Connecticut rejected government claims mid-trial that a group of aerospace engineers unlawfully conspired to restrict hiring.
Last year Dialysis provider DaVita (NYSE:DVA) and its former CEO Kent Thiry defeated the government's claims at trial that they should be held criminally liable for alleged curbs on hiring.
Justice Department antitrust division head Jonathan Kanter has touted the labor antitrust cases despite the court setbacks, noting that judges have allowed such claims to proceed to trial.
Attorneys for Surgical Care argued the Connecticut federal judge's order in the aerospace case should doom the government's health industry case in Texas.
Justice Department lawyers countered that the Connecticut ruling was specific to the evidence in that case.
Get The News You Want
Written By: Reuters
Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.