United States Department of Justice v. Millinery Quality Guild, Inc. et al

Filing 3

ORDER TERMINATING FINAL JUDGMENT granting 1 MISCELLANEOUS CASE INITIATING DOCUMENT - MOTION To Terminate A Legacy Antitrust Judgment. ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED: That said final judgment is hereby terminated. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 12/3/2020) (jca)

Case 1:20-mc-00098-AJN Document 3 Filed 12/03/20 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

12/3/20

United States of America,
Plaintiff,
20-mc-0098 (AJN)
–v–
In Equity No. 75-99
Millinery Quality Guild, Inc., et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER TERMINATING FINAL JUDGMENT
WHEREAS, The Plaintiff has moved this Court to terminate the perpetual final judgment entered
in the above-captioned case, and the Court has considered all papers filed in connection with this
motion;
WHEREAS, This Court has jurisdiction to modify the judgment pursuant to Section VIII of that
judgment;
WHEREAS, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 60(b)(5) and 60(b)(6) provide that “[o]n motion or
just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment . . .
[when] applying it prospectively is no longer equitable . . . [or for] any other reason that justifies
relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(5)-(6);
WHEREAS, the corporate defendants appear to no longer exist or no longer be engaged in
business activities, and it is highly unlikely that the individual defendants are actively engaged in
the relevant activities described in the 86-year-old judgment. See Dkt. No. 1, Ex. D;

1

Case 1:20-mc-00098-AJN Document 3 Filed 12/03/20 Page 2 of 2

WHEREAS, the United States has provided adequate notice to the public regarding its intent to
seek termination of the judgment and has received no public comments;
WHEREAS, the Court deems that terminating the antitrust judgment is consistent with the public
interest, see United States v. Loew’s Inc., 783 F. Supp. 211, 213 (S.D.N.Y. 1992) (in considering
an uncontested motion to terminate judgment in an anti-trust case, a court must determine
whether termination is in the public interest), because the terms of the judgment merely prohibit
that which is already prohibited by the antitrust laws and therefore the judgment no longer serves
its original purpose of protecting competition;

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED:
That said final judgment is hereby terminated.

Dated: December 3, 2020
New York, New York

____________________________________
ALISON J. NATHAN
United States District Judge

2