Chicago Judge Weighs Punishing CFTC Over Statements About Settlement
Kraft Food Groups and Mondelēz Global complained about what the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission said regarding a $16 million settlement announced this week. Now, a Chicago judge wants to hear from the agency.
August 16, 2019 at 10:15 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
A Chicago federal judge on Monday will question the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission over claims that its public statements announcing a $16 million settlement with two major food manufacturers went beyond the limited scope of what enforcers were allowed to say.
The two companies, Kraft Food Groups Inc. and Mondelēz Global LLC, said statements from the commodities agency Thursday “blatantly violate” the terms of a settlement resolving allegations of price manipulation in the wheat market. The consent order, ending four years of litigation, contained a provision that barred both sides from making “any public statement about this case other than to refer to the terms of this settlement agreement or public documents filed in this case.”
CFTC chairman Heath Tarbert, announcing the settlement in a news release, said market manipulation “inflicts real pain on farmers by denying them the fair value of their hard work and crops.” He added: “It also hurts American families by raising the costs of putting food on the table. Instances of market manipulation are precisely the kinds of cases the CFTC was founded to pursue.”
U.S. District Judge John Blakey of the Northern District of Illinois, responding to the companies’ complaints about the CFTC’s comments, set an “emergency” hearing for Monday. The CFTC “should come prepared to answer allegations it has violated court orders and should be held in contempt and or subject to sanctions,” the court said in an order late Thursday.
Representatives from the companies did not say publicly what specific grievances they had with the CFTC’s statements about the settlement, and they did not offer how they think the dispute should be resolved. A spokesperson for the CFTC said in media reports that the “commission’s statement is fully compliant with the terms of the consent order.”
A spokesman for Mondelēz said in an email: “We can’t comment on the settlement per se but we strongly disagree with the CFTC’s statements, which blatantly violate and misrepresent the terms and spirit of the consent order, and will be seeking immediate relief from the court.” A statement from a Kraft representative mirrored that language.
Teams of lawyers from Jenner & Block and Eversheds Sutherland represented Kraft Foods and Mondelēz Global. Chicago-based Jenner partners J. Kevin McCall and Dean Panos did not return messages seeking comment.
The inclusion of a gag provision in the consent order drew two additional government statements that accompanied the main press release: one from the CFTC and one from the agency’s two Democratic commissioners.
The agency said in its statement that commissioners “do not expect the commission to agree to similar language in the future, except in limited situations where our statutory enforcement mission of preventing market manipulation is substantially advanced by the settlement terms and the public’s right to know about commission actions is not impaired.”
Two agency commissioners—Dan Berkovitz and Rostin Behnam—called the speech restriction, and another provision, “unusual.”
“Commissioners, as public officials, must be able to explain to Congress and the public the basis for the sanctions obtained, as well as the rationale for entering into a settlement agreement rather than pursuing litigation,” Berkovitz and Behnam said in their statement. “Although we disagree with any provision restricting the five-member commission’s capacity to make public statements, this provision does not impede our ability to provide information about this case to the public in light of each commissioner’s right to discuss this case freely.”
They added: “In our view, in future situations, the commission should not accept any confidentiality provisions or restrictions on the commission’s ability to make public statements.”
Berkovitz is a former Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr partner in Washington, and Behnam served as an aide to U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan. Berkovitz, nominated by President Donald Trump last year, formerly served at the CFTC’s general counsel from 2009 to 2013. Behnam was nominated by Trump in 2017 and earlier was an investigator for the New Jersey Bureau of Securities. Tarbert, the CFTC chairman, is a former Allen & Overy partner.
Berkovitz and Behnam also raised questions about the absence of factual findings and conclusions of law in the consent order.
“Other federal agencies expressly prohibit consent or settlement agreements that restrict the agency’s ability to speak about settlements or the underlying action,” the two commissioners wrote. They pointed to a U.S. Justice Department policy “that prohibits it from entering into settlement agreements or consent decrees that are subject to a confidentiality provision in any civil matter in which the department is representing the interests of the United States or its agencies.”
That DOJ regulation, Berkovitz and Behnam said, is based on the “strong interest” the public has in knowing about the conduct of federal agencies.
Blakey on Thursday issued a judgment against Kraft and Mondelēz. Still, he retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the consent order.
Read more:
Wilmer’s Dan Berkovitz, Up for CFTC Seat, Reveals Big Law Income, Client List
Allen & Overy Pay Gets Spotlight in Trump Pick for Treasury Post
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLitigators of the Week: A Knockout Blow to Latest FCC Net Neutrality Rules After ‘Loper Bright’
An ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Litigators of the Week: A Win for Homeless Veterans On the VA's West LA Campus
'The Most Peculiar Federal Court in the Country' Comes to Berkeley Law
Trending Stories
- 1Rejuvenation of a Sharp Employer Non-Compete Tool: Delaware Supreme Court Reinvigorates the Employee Choice Doctrine
- 2Mastering Litigation in New York’s Commercial Division Part V, Leave It to the Experts: Expert Discovery in the New York Commercial Division
- 3GOP-Led SEC Tightens Control Over Enforcement Investigations, Lawyers Say
- 4Transgender Care Fight Targets More Adults as Georgia, Other States Weigh Laws
- 5Roundup Special Master's Report Recommends Lead Counsel Get $0 in Common Benefit Fees
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250