Which came first: the chicken or the egg? Most biologists state unequivocally that the egg came first. In IsoNova Technologies, LLC v David L. Rettig and Ovalnnovations, LLC, that age old question was not answered, but the infamous chicken egg was central in the dispute.
McClave + Associates (MC+A), led by Expert Economist Dr. Rob Kneuper, provided econometric analysis on behalf of Ovalnnovations, LLC, a producer of dried egg products. IsoNova,LLC originally sued Ovalnnovations in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa and Ovalnnovations countersued IsoNova claiming IsoNova created and maintained a monopoly in their respective market. Specifically, Ovalnnovations alleged IsoNova maintained a more than majority market share in both the purchase and sale of dried egg products for use in the pet food industry.
Both companies operate in the inedible egg industry. Some eggs are cracked or broken during processing and not suitable for human consumption. These eggs are either sent to waste treatment facilities or provided to another company to be converted to a usable product. Some inedible eggs are used as an ingredient in pet food for household pets. In this case, liquid inedible egg is converted into a dried egg product and sold to pet food manufacturers.
Dr. Kneuper and the MC+A team were hired in 2021 to evaluate OvaInnovation’s antitrust counterclaims in this case, which included that IsoNova was using various mechanisms, including long-term contracts with suppliers, in order to maintain its dominance in the markets for the upstream purchase and downstream sales of inedible eggs in the U.S. According to the allegations, IsoNova’s anticompetitive practices harmed smaller competitors such as Ovalnnovations, leading to diminished sales and profits. In addition to offering an opinion regarding antitrust liability, Dr. Kneuper also estimated damages to OvaInnovations in the form of lost profits and diminished enterprise value, assuming a finding of antitrust liability.
After over two years of work, and multiple expert reports, the case was settled to the satisfaction of Ovalnnovations.
Isonova Technologies, LLC v. David L. Rettig and OvaInnovations, LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-00071