Air Cargo Antitrust Settlements
1:06-md-01775 US District Court Eastern District of New York
Overview
Plaintiffs allege that Defendants conspired to fix, raise, maintain, or stabilize prices of Airfreight Shipping Services by, among other things, coordinating surcharges (such as fuel and security surcharges) and by agreeing to eliminate or prevent discounting of surcharges. They claim that purchasers paid more for Airfreight Shipping Services than they otherwise would have paid.
This summary is for informational purposes only, based on SRG’s review of publicly available information regarding the settlement. Claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own, and more information can be found on the Court’s docket and on the claims administrator’s website www.aircargosettlement5.com.
Class
All persons or entities (but excluding Defendants, their parents, predecessors, successors, subsidiaries, affiliates, as well as government entities) who purchased Airfreight Shipping Services for shipments to, from or within the United States directly from any of the Settling Defendants, any other Defendant, or from any of their parents, predecessors, successors, subsidiaries, or affiliates, at any time during the period January 1, 2000 up to and including September 11, 2006. Airfreight Shipping Services are defined as paid private air transport of freight or other cargo by an airline acting as a provider of such services.
Defendants
- AC Cargo LP
- Aerolineas Brasileiras A.A (Absa)
- Air Canada
- Air China Cargo Company Ltd.
- Air China Ltd.
- Air India
- Air Mauritius Ltd.
- Airways Corp. Of New Zealand Ltd.
- Alitalia Linee Aeree Italiane S.p.A.
- All Nippon Airways Co., Ltd.
- American Airlines, Inc.
- AMR Corporation
- Asiana Airlines, Inc.
- Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings, Inc.
- British Airways PLC
- Cargolux Airlines International S.A.
- Cathay Pacific Airways, Ltd.
- China Airlines, Ltd.
- DAS Air Ltd. (DAS Air Cargo)
- Deutsche Lufthansa AG
- El Al Israel Airlines
- Emirates Airlines
- Ethiopian Airlines Corp.
- EVA Airways Corporation
- Japan Airlines International Co., Ltd.
- Kenya Airways Limited
- KLM
- Korean Airlines Co., Ltd.
- Lan Airlines S.A. (Lan Chile)
- Lan Cargo S.A.
- Lufthansa Cargo AG
- Malaysia Airlines
- Martinair Holland N.V.
- Nippon Cargo Airlines Co., Ltd.
- Polar Air Cargo, Inc.
- Qantas Airways Ltd.
- SAS Cargo Group A/S
- Saudi Arabian Airlines, Ltd.
- Scandinavian Airlines System
- Singapore Airlines Cargo PTE, Ltd.
- Singapore Airlines, Ltd.
- Société Air France
- South African Airways (Proprietary), Ltd.
- Swiss International Air Lines, Ltd.
- Thai Airways International Public Co., Ltd.
- Viação Aérea Rio-Grandense, S.A. (Varig)
Total Settlements |
$1,235,907,442 |
|---|---|
| Lufthansa | $85,000,000 |
| Air France/KLM/Martinair | $87,000,000 |
| American Airlines | $5,000,000 |
| Japan Airlines | $12,000,000 |
| SAS | $13,930,000 |
| All Nippon Airways | $10,400,000 |
| Cargolux | $35,100,000 |
| Qantas | $26,500,000 |
| Thai Airways | $3,500,000 |
| British Airways | $89,512,000 |
| LAN/ABSA | $66,000,000 |
| Malaysia Airlines | $3,200,000 |
| South African Airways | $3,290,000 |
| Saudia | $14,000,000 |
| Emirates | $7,833,000 |
| El Al Israel Airlines | $15,800,000 |
| Air Canada | $7,500,000 |
| Korean Air | $115,000,000 |
| Singapore Air | $92,492,442 |
| Cathay Pacific | $65,000,000 |
| China Airlines | $90,000,000 |
| EVA Air | $99,000,000 |
| Nippon Cargo | $36,350,000 |
| Asiana Airlines | $55,000,000 |
| Polar Air | $100,000,000 |
| Air China | $50,000,000 |
| Air New Zealand | $35,000,000 |
| Air India | $12,500,000 |
Filing Deadline: Contact SRG
Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims. We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.
Air Cargo Canada Antitrust Settlements
Court File 50389CP Ontario Court of Justice & Related Cases
Overview
Plaintiffs allege that Defendants conspired to fix, raise, maintain, or stabilize prices of Airfreight Shipping Services by, among other things, coordinating surcharges (such as fuel and security surcharges) and by agreeing to eliminate or prevent discounting of surcharges. They claim that purchasers paid more for Airfreight Shipping Services than they otherwise would have paid.
Class
All persons or entities (but excluding Defendants, their parents, predecessors, successors, subsidiaries, affiliates, as well as government entities) who purchased air cargo shipping services from any air cargo carrier for shipments within, to, or from Canada (except shipments to or from Canada and the United States) during the period from January 1, 2000 to September 11, 2006, including those persons who purchased air cargo shipping services through freight forwarders. Airfreight Shipping Services are defined as paid private air transport of freight or other cargo by an airline acting as a provider of such services.
Defendants
- AC Cargo LP
- Air Canada
- Asiana Airlines, Inc.
- Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings, Inc.
- British Airways PLC
- Cargolux Airlines International S.A.
- Cathay Pacific Airways, Ltd.
- Deutsche Lufthansa AG
- Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (KLM)
- Korean Airlines Co., Ltd.
- Japan Airlines International Co., Ltd.
- Lan Airlines S.A. (Lan Chile)
- Lan Cargo S.A.
- Lufthansa Cargo AG
- Martinair Holland N.V.
- Polar Air Cargo, Inc.
- Royal Dutch Airlines
- Scandinavian Airlines System
- Singapore Airlines Cargo PTE, Ltd.
- Singapore Airlines, Ltd.
- Société Air France
- Swiss International Air Lines, Ltd.
Total Settlements |
CDN $29,593,307 |
|---|---|
| Lufthansa | CDN $6,243,307 |
| Japan Airlines | CDN $738,000 |
| Scandinavian Airlines | CDN $300,000 |
| Qantas Airways | CDN $237,000 |
| Cargolux | CDN $1,800,000 |
| Singapore Airlines | CDN $1,050,000 |
| Air France/KLM | CDN $6,500,000 |
| LAN Airlines | CDN $700,000 |
| Polar Air Cargo | CDN $425,000 |
| Asiana Airlines | CDN $1,500,000 |
| Korean Air Lines | CDN $4,100,000 |
| Cathay Pacific | CDN $6,000,000 |
Filing Deadline: Contact SRG
Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims. We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.
Automotive Parts Occupant Safety Systems Direct Purchasers Settlement
2:12-md-02311 US District Court Eastern Michigan Southern Division
Overview
In 2012, class action lawsuits were filed against Defendants by Plaintiffs, on behalf of direct purchasers of Occupant Safety Systems. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants conspired to suppress and eliminate competition for Occupant Safety Systems by agreeing to fix prices, rig bids and allocate the supply of Occupant Safety Systems in violation of federal antitrust laws. Therefore, direct purchasers of Occupant Safety Systems in the United States overpaid for those products. The Settling Defendants deny the allegations, but agreed to settle to avoid further litigation. The Court has not ruled on the Plaintiffs’ claims or Defendants’ defenses. This is a partial settlement with Toyoda Gosei and Tokai Rika only.
Class
Anyone that purchased Occupant Safety Systems in the United States directly from any defendant company between January 1, 2003 and February 25, 2015 may be eligible. “Occupant Safety Systems” are considered seat belts, airbags, steering wheels or steering systems, safety electronic systems, and related parts and components.
Defendants
- Autoliv, Inc
- Autoliv ASP, Inc.
- Autoliv Safety Technology, Inc.
- Autoliv B.V. & Co. KG
- Autoliv Japan Ltd.
- Takata Corporation
- TK Holdings, Inc.
- Tokai Rika Co., Ltd.
- TRAM, Inc. dba Tokai Rika USA Inc.
- Toyoda Gosei Co., Ltd.
- Toyoda Gosei North America Corp.
- TG Missouri Corp.
- TRW Automotive Holdings Corporation
- TRW Deutschland Holding
- Filing Deadline: Contact SRG
Filing Deadline: Contact SRG
Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims. We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.
Automotive Parts Wire Harness Products Direct Purchasers Settlement
2:12-md-02311 US District Court Eastern Michigan Southern Division
Overview
Beginning in 2011, class action lawsuits were filed against Defendants by Plaintiffs, who are direct purchasers of Wire Harness Products in the United States. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants conspired to suppress and eliminate competition for Wire Harness Products by agreeing to rig bids and fix prices of Wire Harness Products in violation of federal antitrust laws. Therefore, direct purchasers of Wire Harness Products in the United States overpaid for those products. The Settling Defendants deny the allegations, but agreed to settle to avoid further litigation. The Court has not ruled on the Plaintiffs’ claims or Defendants’ defenses. This is a settlement with the Settling Defendants only. Plaintiffs are still pursuing the case against the non-settling Defendants.
Class
Anyone that purchased Wire Harness Products in the United States directly from any defendant company between January 1, 2000 and December 13, 2016 may be eligible. “Wire Harnesses” are considered electrical distribution systems used to direct and control electronic components, wiring, and circuit boards in motor vehicles. “Wire Harness Products” means wire harnesses and related products: automotive electrical wiring, lead wire assemblies, cable bond, automotive wiring connectors, automotive wiring terminals, high voltage wiring, electronic control units, fuse boxes, relay boxes, junction blocks, power distributors, and speed sensor wire assemblies used in motor vehicles.
Defendants
- Chiyoda Manufacturing Corporation
- Denso Corporation
- Denso International America, Inc.
- Fujikura Ltd.
- Fujikura Automotive America LLC
- Furukawa Electric Co., Ltd.
- American Furukawa, Inc.
- Furukawa Wiring Systems America, Inc. f/k/a Furukawa Lear Corp. and Lear Furukawa Corp.
- G.S. Electech, Inc.
- G.S. Wiring Systems Inc.
- G.S.W. Manufacturing, Inc.
- Lear Corporation
- LEONI Wiring Systems, Inc.
- Leonische Holding Inc.
- Mitsubishi Electric Corporation
- Mitsubishi Electric US Holdings, Inc.
- Mitsubishi Electric Automotive America, Inc.
- Sumitomo Electric Industries, Ltd.
- Sumitomo Wiring Systems, Ltd.
- Sumitomo Electric Wiring Systems, Inc.
- K&S Wiring Systems, Inc.
- Sumitomo Wiring Systems (U.S.A.), Inc.
- Tokai Rika Co., Ltd.
- TRAM, Inc.
- Yazaki Corporation;
- Yazaki North America, Inc.
Total Settlements: |
$257,801,000 |
|---|---|
| Lear Corporation | $4,750,000 |
| G.S. Electech | $3,100,000 |
| Tokai Rika | $800,000 |
| Chiyoda | $1,150,000 |
| Fujikura | $9,500,000 |
| LEONI | $1,000,000 |
| Sumitomo | $25,421,000 |
| Yazaki | $212,080,000 |
Filing Deadline: Contact SRG
Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims. We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.
Freight Forwarders Antitrust Settlements
1:08-cv00042 US District Court, Eastern District of New York
Overview
Direct purchasers of freight forwarding services in the United States claim that the major global freight forwarding companies conspired to fix various prices and surcharges for freight forwarding services in violation of U.S. federal antitrust laws. As a result, purchasers paid more for freight forwarding services than they otherwise would have paid. The first round of the freight forwarder settlements totaled $105,611,864, and August 24, 2015 was the deadline to file claims. The second round of the Freight Forwarders Settlement totaled $197,623,497. The current round is $53,550,000.
Class
All persons (excluding governmental entities, Defendants, their respective parents, subsidiaries and affiliates) who directly purchased Freight Forwarding Services (a) for shipments within, to, or from the United States, or (b) purchased or sold in the United States regardless of the location of shipment; from any of the Defendants, subsidiary or affiliate, at any time from January 1, 2001 to January 4, 2011.
Defendants
- ABX Logistics Group
- Agility Logistics Corporation
- Air Express International USA, Inc.
- Baltrans Logistics, Inc.
- BAX Global Inc.
- Dachser Intelligent Logistics
- Dachser Transport of America, Inc.
- Danzas Corporation dba DHL Global Forwarding
- DB Schenker
- Deutsche Bahn AG
- Deutsche Post AG
- DHL Express (USA), Inc.
- DHL Global Forwarding Japan K.K.
- DHL Japan, Inc.
- DSV A/S
- DSV Air & Sea Ltd.
- DSV Solutions Holding A/S
- EGL Eagle Global Logistics LP
- EGL Inc.
- Exel Global Logistics, Inc.
- K Line Logistics (USA) Inc.
- K Line Logistics Ltd.
- Kintetsu World Express (USA) Inc.
- Kintetsu World Express Inc.
- Kuehne + Nagel, Inc.
- Kuhne + Nagel International AG
- MOL Logistics Co. (Japan) Ltd.
- MOL Logistics (USA) Inc.
- Morrison Express Corporation (USA)
- Morrison Express Logistics PTE Ltd.
- Nippon Express Co. Ltd.
- Nippon Express USA, Inc.
- Nishi-Nippon Railroad Co. Ltd.
- Nissin Corporation
- Nissin International Transport USA Inc.
- Panalpina World Transport (Holding) Ltd.
- Panalpina, Inc.
- Schenker AG
- Schenker Inc.
- SDV Logistique Internationale
Current Settlements: $53,550,000
Filing Deadline: Contact SRG
Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims. We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.
Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Direct Purchaser Settlement
1:07-mc-00489 US District Court District of Columbia
Overview
Plaintiffs claim that, from 2003 through 2008, the Defendant companies unlawfully assessed a rail freight surcharge applied as a percentage of the base rate for freight transport services purchased in the United States. The fuel surcharge was either stand-alone, or included in the base rate of the freight service. Plaintiffs claim that any person or entity that purchased Rail Freight directly from any Defendant company during the Class Period paid a higher price than they otherwise would have paid in a competitive market.
Class
Individuals and entities who, between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2008 (the “Class Period”), purchased rate-unregulated Rail Freight Transport Services in the United States directly from any of the Defendant companies.
Defendants
- BNSF Railway Company
- CSX Transportation Inc.
- Norfolk Southern Railway Company
- Union Pacific Railroad Company
Settlements: Not Yet Established
Filing Deadline: Not Yet Established
Settlement Recovery Group, LLC (“SRG”) is not the official claims administrator, class counsel or any party in the case. SRG is a third party claims filing service that can be hired to file and track claims. We specialize in helping companies and small businesses file claims to obtain their fair share of settlement money from class action lawsuits once a settlement has been reached. Our services are voluntary and are not required to file a claim; claimants may file a no-cost claim on their own. This summary is for informational purposes only and is based on SRG’s review of publicly available case documents. Official information can be found on the case website and on the court docket. This summary is not and should not be construed as legal, tax, or other professional advice.
