Axon, the manufacturer of Taser stun guns and body camera
systems for police departments, has been the target of FTC
scrutiny since 2018, when the regulator requested information
from the Arizona-based company about its acquisition of Vievu.
Vievu was a smaller player in the market for body cameras and
online storage and management of the footage they generate.
In the complaint filed on Friday in U.S. District Court in
Arizona, Axon said it complied with regulators' requests for 18
months at a cost of $1.5 million in legal fees.
Last month, Axon alleges, FTC officials told the company it
would have to unwind its Vievu acquisition by divesting the
assets and offering patent licenses to any potential acquirer.
Axon alleged that in a December 2019 face-to-face meeting with
its attorney, the FTC threatened to start an internal
administrative law proceeding this month to unwind the Vievu
deal if Axon would not agree to the settlement.
In its filing, Axon denied the deal was anticompetitive and
asked for the matter to be heard in a federal court.
"Axon is eager to prove its case in any federal court in this
country," the company wrote.
The FTC can choose to file antitrust actions either in federal
district courts as a lawsuit or pursue them in an internal
administrative law procedure.
Axon alleges that FTC's internal administrative proceedings are
unfair because they can only be appealed to the full FTC
commission, which Axon argued has sided with administrative law
judges 100% of the time in the past two decades.
While the outcome of the FTC's decision can then be appealed to
federal appeals court, no new facts or evidence can be
introduced, making it harder to overturn the cases, Axon argued.
Axon is also asking a federal judge to declare the FTC's
administrative law process unconstitutional because it can take
away a company's intellectual property without a hearing before
a neutral judge.
The company is also asking the judge to declare the FTC's
structure unconstitutional because its commissioners exercise
law enforcement powers but cannot be removed by the U.S.
president at will.
(Reporting by Stephen Nellis in San Francisco; Editing by Himani
Sarkar)
[© 2020 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2020 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|
|