In re Pork Antitrust Litigation

Background

The Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs entered into a Settlement Agreement with Agri Stats, Inc. On May 1, 2026, they moved for preliminary approval of the proposed class-action settlement, approval of the proposed notice plan, and permission to distribute notice. The court had previously certified the Direct Purchaser Plaintiff class and appointed Lockridge Grindal Nauen PLLP and Pearson Warshaw, LLP as co-lead class counsel. It had also previously approved A.B. Data, Ltd. as the settlement administrator for earlier settlements in the matter.

The certified class consists of people and entities that directly purchased specified types of pork, or products derived from those types of pork, from defendants or their subsidiaries or affiliates for use or delivery in the United States from June 29, 2014, through June 30, 2018. The definition excludes specified products, including organic products, products labeled “no antibiotics ever,” fully cooked or breaded products, and certain marinated, flavored, cured, or smoked products. The order also lists excluded defendants and their related persons and entities, governmental entities, judicial personnel and their immediate family and staff, jurors assigned to the action, and identified co-conspirators.

Preliminary Approval

The court concluded that the proposed Settlement Agreement was reached through arm’s-length negotiations by experienced counsel and fell within the range of possible approval. It preliminarily found that the agreement appeared fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best interests of the certified class, with no obvious reason to doubt its fairness. This approval was for settlement purposes and was subject to further consideration at a final fairness hearing; the order did not finally approve the settlement.

The court concluded that another opportunity to opt out was not warranted or required because certified class members had already been given an opportunity to exclude themselves, and the court had approved the final exclusion list on January 24, 2024. The court also characterized the agreement as similar to a class settlement in which injunctive relief predominates over monetary relief. It stated that classes certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2) do not permit members to opt out.

Notice Plan and Administrator

The court approved distribution of notice under Rule 23(c)(2)(A) and authorized co-lead class counsel to use funds from an already established future litigation expense fund to pay its portion of the notice costs. A.B. Data, Ltd. was appointed as the Settlement and Notice Administrator and ordered to carry out the notice plan.

The court found that the proposed plan was the best notice practicable under the circumstances and complied with Rule 23(c)(2) and due process. The plan calls for individual mail and email notice to identifiable class members, supported by publication notice for members who cannot be individually identified. The court approved the proposed long-form, short-form, publication, and postcard notices, finding that they adequately inform class members about the action, class definition, claims and issues, objection procedures, the expired exclusion period, the possibility of appearing through an attorney, and the binding effect of a class judgment.

The administrator was directed to mail postcard notices to class members whose names and addresses could be derived from available information, provide the long-form notice to people who request it, publish digital banner advertisements for four weeks on specified news websites or comparable alternatives, and continue operating the existing case-specific telephone number and website. Non-substantive changes to the notices, such as typographical corrections, could be made by agreement of the parties without further court permission.

Schedule and Disposition

The court adopted the proposed schedule. Notice was to begin within 14 days of the order. Class members’ deadline to object was 30 days after notice began. Co-lead class counsel were required to file materials supporting final approval and respond to objections 14 days before the final fairness hearing. The final fairness hearing was set for September 8, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. by video conference, subject to possible postponement or continuation.

The court granted the motion to preliminarily approve the Direct Purchaser Plaintiff class’s proposed settlement with Agri Stats, Inc. and to approve notice. The order granted preliminary approval only and set the matter for further consideration at the fairness hearing.