Court Orders Beef Packer to Process Niman Ranch Cattle

by Susan Kelly, meatingplace.com

Afederal judge has ruled that Missouri Prime Beef Packers must process cattle supplied by Niman Ranch, following a previously executed agreement between the companies.

Missouri Prime had agreed to process and fabricate Niman Ranch cattle into wholesale cuts and ground beef products under a February 2021 contract, according to the court order. The contract, which expires in January 2024, allowed either party to terminate the agreement early with at least 90 days’ written notice.

In December, a Missouri Prime executive notified Niman Ranch of a decision to stop processing Niman’s cattle, stating “we have no choice if we want to remain solvent,” according to the court order. Niman responded by asking Missouri Prime to honor its agreement and provide 90 days’ notice before termination.

Niman Ranch said it did not have the time necessary to find a replacement processor, noting that compliance with USDA labeling approval and Certified Humane certification processes requires much longer than three weeks. The result was that Niman Ranch would be unable to provide finished meat products to its customers, according to court documents.

Niman also argued that Missouri Prime’s refusal to process its cattle would “permanently damage Niman Ranch’s hard-won reputation for meeting its customers’ needs.” In addition, Niman said cattle that remain unprocessed for too long cannot be used for grass-fed programs, putting the company at risk of losing some of its suppliers.

The court order noted the defendants’ only argument was that the agreement was not valid because the contract provided by Niman Ranch was incomplete.

The court said it determined that Missouri Prime terminated the agreement because it found more lucrative business opportunities, despite its ongoing responsibilities under the contract with Niman Ranch. The court also found that Missouri Prime followed the requirements and schedules of the agreement until its December termination email.

The court agreed that Niman could suffer irreparable harm to its reputation and granted Niman’s motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.

Niman Ranch is owned by Perdue Farms, which bought the farmer and rancher network in 2015. Missouri Prime Beef Packers began operating its processing facility in early 2021. ▫ New DOJ Antitrust Head Says He’ll ‘Reinvigorate’ Enforcement

by Peter Thomas Ricci, meatingplace.com

The new assistant attorney general of the Department of Justice’s antitrust division has announced how he plans to promote competition in the U.S. economy – and meat processing may be a part of those efforts.

Jonathan Kanter, who was confirmed for his position in November, outlined his legal strategies in an address Monday to the New York State Bar Association, describing how he intends to “reinvigorate” antitrust law enforcement.

Collaborating with USDA

Kanter unveiled a DOJ initiative called Antitrust Enforcement for All-of-Government that involves collaborating with partner agencies to “ensure that competition issues are thoroughly considered, and pursued, under all of the statutes that promote competition in the economy.”

In particular, Kanter said the initiative is consistent with President Biden’s July 2021 executive order on competition, which specifically encouraged Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to engage with animal agriculture.

Biden’s order stated that Vilsack shall consider, among other things, “providing clear rules that identify recurrent practices in the livestock, meat, and poultry industries that are unfair, unjustly discriminatory, or deceptive and therefore violate the Packers and Stockyards Act.”

Biden’s order also encouraged Vilsack to prohibit “unfair practices related to grower ranking systems — systems in which the poultry companies, contractors, or dealers exercise extraordinary control over numerous inputs that determine the amount farmers are paid and require farmers to assume the risk of factors outside their control, leaving them more economically vulnerable.”

Antitrust enforcement not ‘keeping pace’

Kanter said antitrust law has not kept pace with the rate of economic development in the past 20 years, and thus he is looking to “reinvigorate antitrust enforcement.”

“That is why,” Kanter continued, “we and our law enforcement partners are committed to using every tool available to promote competition. The American people deserve real antitrust enforcement that meets the economic challenges that we confront.”

A graduate of Washington University School of Law, Kanter was previously an attorney in the Federal Trade Commission, and founder of the Kanter Law Group.

Focus on concentration

Kanter’s address also signaled a new focus on concentration in U.S. industries, including agriculture. He argued that such concentration depresses wages and makes it harder for “entrepreneurs and small businesses to get off the ground.”

“I am deeply concerned about these trends,” Kanter said. “Too little competition hurts real people, every day. It’s not just a statistical or economic concept. It is a halfempty grocery cart for Americans who can’t afford price hikes and padded margins. Or lower salaries and worse working conditions because of employers who face too little competition and workers who do not have sufficient options.”

Obligation to enforce laws

Paying particular attention to mergers, Kanter said the DOJ has an obligation to enforce antitrust laws and challenge mergers that lessen competition. That includes working with the FTC on existing guidelines to mergers and consulting with “state enforcers, other government agencies, businesses, trade and labor groups, scholars and the American people.”

Kanter also shared a skepticism toward merger settlements, and said blocking mergers is the “surest way” to preserve competition.

“I am concerned that merger remedies short of blocking a transaction too often miss the mark,” Kanter said. “Complex settlements, whether behavioral or structural, suffer from significant deficiencies. Therefore, in my view, when the division concludes that a merger is likely to lessen competition, in most situations we should seek a simple injunction to block the transaction. It is the surest way to preserve competition. ▫