Antitrust-Related Recent Developments: Merger Agreement Efforts Subject of Litigation

Sep 26, 2016

Reading Time : 2 min

Abbott agreed to acquire Alere on January 30, 2016, for $5.8 billion. Soon afterward (on April 28, 2016), Abbott also agreed to acquire St. Jude Medical Inc. for $25 billion. On August 30, 2016, Alere sued Abbott, alleging that Abbott was attempting to back out of the Alere acquisition by stalling the antitrust review process until April 30, 2016, the deal’s walkaway date. Alere pointed particularly to Abbott’s alleged failure to: (1) comply with the Federal Trade Commission’s Second Request; (2) provide notice and an opportunity to comment to Alere prior to entering into a timing agreement with the FTC; and (3) follow up on foreign antitrust clearance filings. Alere asserted that Abbott’s conduct breached Abbott’s covenant in the merger agreement to take all steps necessary to clear antitrust hurdles “as promptly as reasonably practicable.” Alere requested expedited trial on its claims, arguing that Abbott’s behavior places the April 30, 2016, deadline for the deal’s completion in serious jeopardy.

In response to the motion for expedited treatment, Abbott argued that the eight months remaining before the deadline closing date are more than sufficient to clear any regulatory hurdles. Abbott further asserted that uncertainty with respect to the accuracy of Alere’s financial reporting, which led to a delay in Alere’s 10-K filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, put the deal in a period of limbo. Abbott noted that, since the 10-K filing, representatives of the companies have held weekly meetings to make sure that the antitrust approval process is proceeding.  Abbott also argued that Alere could not claim irreparable harm where Alere itself was not ready to close due to no shareholder vote and no proxy approval from the SEC.

After hearing oral argument on the motion to expedite on September 2, 2016, Vice Chancellor Glasscock concluded that it was appropriate to grant Alere’s request for expedited trial.  However, he recommended that, rather than proceed to litigate, the parties engage in mediation. Vice Chancellor Glasscock stated that the process would permit the parties to establish a clear plan with which Abbott can comply that is sufficient to give Alere some assurances that antitrust regulatory requirements are being met in a timely manner. Both parties subsequently agreed to mediate the dispute.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Deal Diary

June 27, 2024

On June 24, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published five new Form 8-K Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DIs) expanding the agency’s interpretations of cybersecurity incident disclosures pursuant to Item 1.05 of Form 8-K. In July 2023, the SEC adopted final rules with respect to cybersecurity incidents that generally require public companies to disclose (i) material cybersecurity incidents within four business days after determining the incident was material and (ii) material information regarding their cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance on an annual basis. We wrote about the final cybersecurity disclosure rules here.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 12, 2024

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently adopted final rules (available here; also see the fact sheet and press release) representing significant changes to  special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), shell companies and the disclosure of projections. These rules aim to enhance disclosures, protect investors and align the regulatory framework for SPACs with traditional IPOs. The following summarizes the key aspects of these rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

October 4, 2023

On September 20, 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a final rule amending the so-called “Names Rule” (found here) that is “designed to modernize and enhance” protections under Rule 35d-1 of the Investment Company Act of 1940. The final rule is part of the SEC’s holistic efforts to regulate environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters, and is the SEC’s latest attempt to curb greenwashing in U.S. capital markets. The amendments require registered investment funds that include ESG factors in their names to place 80% of their assets in investments corresponding to those factors, thereby extending to ESG funds the SEC’s long-standing approach of regulating the names of registered funds to ensure they are marketed to investors truthfully. Fund complexes with more than $1 billion in assets will have two years from the final rule’s effective date (60 days after publication in the Federal Register) to comply, while fund complexes with less than $1 billion in assets will be given a compliance period of 30 months.

Chair Gary Gensler said “[t]he Names Rule reflects a basic idea: A fund’s investment portfolio should match a fund’s advertised investment focus. In essence, if a fund’s name suggests an investment focus, the fund in turn needs to invest shareholders’ dollars in a manner consistent with that investment focus. Otherwise, a fund’s portfolio might be inconsistent with what fund investors desired when selecting a fund based upon its name.” The sole dissenting vote against the rule modification, Commissioner Mark Uyeda, said “[w]ith these amendments, the Commission overemphasizes the importance of a fund’s name, as if to suggest that investors and their financial professionals need not look at the prospectus disclosures.” Commissioner Uyeda also expressed concern that fund investors will bear the increased compliance costs associated with the rule change.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 31, 2023

As discussed in our prior publication (found here), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted amendments on December 14, 2022, regarding Rule 10b5-1 insider trading plans and related disclosures. On May 25, 2023, the SEC issued three new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DIs) relating to the Rule 10b5-1 amendments.

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.