After Jeld-Wen filed a Notice of Appeal, seeking to undo the results of a nearly decade-long legal battle, and Steves and Sons Inc. (Steves) and WG Towanda LLC/Woodgrain Inc. (Woodgrain) fired back with a response, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) weighed in.
A 2021 ruling required Jeld-Wen to divest a door skins plant in Towanda, Pennsylvania, to remedy harm to Steves, after a jury found that Jeld-Wen’s acquisition of the Towanda door skin plant violated Section 7 of the Clayton (antitrust) Act.
Jeld-Wen followed through on the divestiture in late 2024, when it sold the plant to Woodgrain. Now that Steves is building its own door skins plant in Athens, Georgia, the divestiture of the Towanda plant is “inequitable,” Jeld-Wen argues. The DOJ filed an amicus brief, participating as amicus curiae in the appeal, suggesting the court was right to uphold a ruling for divestiture. A second attempt by Jeld-Wen to reverse that ruling should also be denied, the DOJ argues, as the original order’s objectives haven’t been fully achieved, nor have public interests been met despite changes in market conditions, the brief said. The DOJ clarified government interests in enforcing federal antitrust laws, adding, “The United States also has a significant interest in ensuring the availability of effective remedies in private antitrust cases, including divestitures.”
The DOJ justified its opinion by suggesting that the divestiture order’s objectives have not been fully achieved. The divestiture continues to serve both the plaintiff’s relief and the public interest, the brief said.
The DOJ’s argument centers around Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(5), under which Jeld-Wen sought relief. In doing so, the company needed to demonstrate a significant change in fact or law, making the judgment inequitable.
In its brief, the DOJ supported the district court’s finding that Steves continues to suffer irreparable injury. Even with its new door skin plant, Steves will remain a “net buyer” of door skins, the brief said. For this reason, Steves will remain subject to the anticompetitive effects of Jeld-Wen’s illegal acquisition of Towanda, including foreclosure risk, the DOJ said—an ongoing injury that it deems a legitimate basis for maintaining the divestiture. If Jeld-Wen were allowed to take back the Towanda plant, it would improperly retain “the fruits of its statutory violation,” the brief declared. Allowing Jeld-Wen to reopen the case would undermine a legal framework designed to facilitate the speedy enforcement of antitrust laws and successful divestiture sales—one that’s designed to establish the appropriateness of divestiture early in cases, the DOJ said.
In its brief, the DOJ urged the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to affirm the district court’s decision to uphold the divestiture order.