This document is available in two formats: this web page (for browsing content) and PDF (comparable to original document formatting). To view the PDF you will need Acrobat Reader, which may be downloaded from the Adobe site. For an official signed copy, please contact the Antitrust Documents Group.

U.S. Department of Justice Seal and Letterhead
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 1994
AT
(202) 616-2771
TDD (202) 514-1888


TWO RESIDENTIAL DOOR MANUFACTURERS CHARGED FOR
INVOLVEMENT IN PRICE FIXING CONSPIRACY

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Two residential door manufacturers, one from Illinois and the other from Kentucky, were charged today with participating in a conspiracy to fix the prices of residential flush doors, according to the Department of Justice's Antitrust Division.

Including today's charges, four cases have been filed as a result of the Antitrust Division's investigation into collusive practices in the $600 million residential flush door industry. To date, more than $6 million in fines have been imposed.

Illinois Flush Door Inc. of Plainfield, Illinois, and LEDCO, Inc. of Shelbyville, Kentucky, were charged with participating in a price fixing conspiracy for sales of residential flush doors to certain customers in the United States from January to December, 1993.

Residential flush doors are made of flat wood that can be covered with various types of door facings and are used primarily in residential basements, bedrooms and bathrooms. They are sold to U.S. door distributors and wholesalers, home improvement centers and residential construction companies.

Anne K. Bingaman, Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division, said that the charges, filed in the U.S. District Court in Tampa, Florida, arose in connection with a grand jury investigation in Tampa into collusive practices by flush door manufacturers.

The continuing investigation is being conducted by the Division's Litigation I Section with the assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The maximum penalty for a corporation convicted of a violation of the Sherman Act is the greatest of a $10 million fine, twice the gross pecuniary gain the corporation derived from the crime or twice the gross pecuniary loss caused to the victims of the crime.

###

94-663