United States v. Edwards LifeSciences Corp. and Genesis MedTech Group Limited; Proposed Final Judgment and Competitive Impact Statement

ply to this Court for any order necessary or appropriate for the modification, interpretation, or enforcement of the Final Judgment. VI. Alternatives to the Proposed Final Judgment As an alternative to the proposed Final Judgment, the United States considered a full trial on the merits against the Defendants. The United States is satisfied, however, that the relief required by the proposed Final Judgment will remedy the violation alleged in the Complaint and deter violations by similarly situated entities in the future. Thus, the proposed Final Judgment achieves all or substantially all of the relief the United States would have obtained through litigation but avoids the time, expense, and uncertainty of a full trial on the merits. VII. Standard of Review Under the APPA for the Proposed Final Judgment Under the Clayton Act and APPA, proposed Final Judgments, or ``consent decrees,'' in antitrust cases brought by the United States are subject to a sixty (60) day comment period, after which the court shall determine whether entry of the proposed Final Judgment is ``in the public interest.'' 15 U.S.C. 16(e)(1). In making that determination, the court, in accordance with the statute as amended in 2004, is required to consider: (A) the competitive impact of such judgment, including termination of alleged violations, provisions for enforcement and modification, duration of relief soug