In In re: Photochromic Lens Antitrust Litigation, Florida Middle District Court Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Jenkins denied class certification to a group of direct purchasers in multidistrict antitrust litigation (MDL) accusing Transitions Optical Inc. of impeding competition in the photochromic lenses market. The MDL followed an FTC investigation that found that Transitions maintained a monopoly position in the photochromic lens market by taking part in exclusive dealings at almost all levels of the distribution chain. In 2010, Transitions settled the case with the FTC, and agreed to stop engaging in exclusive deals that threatened the competition.
In the present MDL, the direct purchaser plaintiffs seek to represent a class of all persons or entities that purchased Transitions lenses directly from any defendant or any lab owned by Essilor or America, Inc. between March 3, 2006, and the present. According to the plaintiffs, their class consists of about 17 lens casters that purchased lenses from Transitions, about 1,500 independent wholesale labs that purchased lenses from Essilor of America Inc. — whose parent company owns a 49 percent stake in Transitions — and more than 36,000 retailers and independent eye care professionals who also bought lenses from Essilor. In denying plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, the court held that plaintiffs failed to show that there is no conflict of interest between class representatives and lens casters, and that class representatives could represent lens casters in light of the fact that some lends casters had entered into and benefited from exclusivity agreements with Transitions. The court further held that the plaintiffs failed to show that common questions predominate in the case. According to the court, plaintiffs had only demonstrated that 88 percent of lens casters were affected by Transitions’ alleged anti-competitive behavior and plaintiffs had arrived at that number through a flawed methodology.
3 Comments