In March of 2015, consumers for disposable contacts commenced a class action lawsuit against four major manufacturers of disposable contact lenses in the United States. Among the Defendants were Alcon Vision LLC, Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, CooperVision, Bausch & Lomb Inc., ABB Optical Group, LLC (“Manufacturers”). The Complaint alleged that the Manufacturers were in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, because they restrained competition and conducted unfair competition laws by implementing “unilateral pricing policies” on specific disposable contact lenses. In essence, the Complaint was of the position that the Manufacturers conspired a scheme towards eliminating the discounting of contact lenses by ensuring that all retailers charged the same minimum price. Section 1 of the Sherman Act provides that “[e]very contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce … is declared to be illegal.” 15 U.S.C. § 1. However, the plain meaning of the statute itself did not satisfy its purpose. The courts went on to elaborate and establish precedent that gave this statute further interpretation and weight, holding that a plaintiff has the burden of showing that there is an existence of a contract, combination, or conspiracy among two or more persons or entities; that unreasonably restrains trade or competition; and which affects interstate or foreign commerce.

Despite the allegations presented by the class action lawsuit, the Manufacturers denied any participation in a conspiracy and further stated that their unilateral pricing policies did not unreasonably restrain competition. It is important to note that a key distinction between criminal and civil conspiracy is that a mere agreement or existence of one is not enough, there must also be damages resulting from the commission of wrong which injures another. With this is mind, counsel for Plaintiffs estimated that nearly 40 million purchasers of disposable contact lenses were subject to these schemes and as a result suffered economic damages. After more than seven years of litigation, the Plaintiffs reached a settlement with Johnson & Johnson Vision Care and Alcon Vision, LLC, resulting in a combined settlement of 75 million dollars. Irrespective of the allegations brought to the public attention, Manufacturers still hold their position that they did not conspire to form a deceptive scheme.