Lawyers representing embattled former Bumble Bee CEO Chris Lischewski have filed yet another request to get his name dropped from a civil lawsuit filed by Associated Wholesale Grocers (AWG) alleging he participated in the fixing of canned tuna prices in the US market.
In a request filed with a US district court in southern California Oct. 19, lawyers for the former CEO said the AWG lawsuit was filed in Kansas and does not apply to Lischewski, a California resident.
"AWG suggests that Mr. Lischewski is subject to personal jurisdiction in Kansas based solely on the alleged actions of his former employer, Bumble Bee. The caselaw is clear, however, that an employer’s activities in the forum state cannot be imputed to its employee," the lawyers contend.
The company filed a similar request in August to dismiss the lawsuit.
The lawyers said the court created a deadline of July 1, 2017 for adding new parties to the price-fixing lawsuit against Bumble Bee. Lischewski's name was added to multidistrict litigation in a filing by AWG at the end of April, two and a half years after it was originally filed, according to court documents.
The lawyers contend that Lischewski is "not a proper party" to AWG's case that covers a period between 2004 to 2015.
In May Lischewski was indicted in a separate criminal case on a charge of participating in the fixing of prices of packaged seafood.
See more IntraFish coverage on the case here.
2004 - 2010. Defendants shared a common canner in American Samoa, Impress, which is allegedly connected to collusive can size reduction.
2004. Groups colluded to increase prices of canned tuna at least twice.
2006. Groups colluded to increase prices of canned tuna at least once. “By 2007, defendants became more practiced and ambitious in their collusive designs," allegedly downsizing their can size while raising prices.
2007: The NFI created the Tuna Council, whose only members were the defendants, allegedly.
2008. Alleged collusion on price increases on canned tuna.
2010: Defendants allegedly colluded and raised net prices on canned tuna. Net prices are the prices disseminated to brokers of shelf stable seafood products, and represent the list price, less promotional allowances offered by defendants to reduce the list price.
November 2011 - June 2013: Senior executives and sales personnel of the StarKist, Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea allegedly "exchanged emails and had telephone conversations about discounting and promotional practices and terms for the sale of canned tuna to customers." They also allegedly "assured each other that they would not compete regarding the pricing and sale of canned tuna sold to customers."
December 2011 and January 2012: Senior executives and sales personnel of defendants allegedly had telephone conversations "about coordinating and announcing a price increase for a number of products in the second quarter of 2012." Price increases were allegedly "virtually identical" and "other products also increased by identical percentages."
2011 - 2013: StarKist, Chicken of the Sea and Bumble Bee allegedly told customers certain factors in the tuna sector made it necessary to increase tuna prices. They allegedly "cited their own predictions about where the tuna market was heading as the basis for a price increase."
2012 - July 2015: Defendants and their co-conspirators allegedly agreed to avoid FAD-free tuna.
July 2015: Published reports revealed US Department of Justice convened a grand jury to investigate potential antitrust violations by companies in the market for the production, pricing and/or sale of packaged seafood, including canned tuna.
