EssilorLuxottica defeats consumer antitrust lawsuits over frames, lenses​

By Mike Scarcella

Sept 26 (Reuters) - Eyewear giant EssilorLuxottica on Friday convinced a U.S. judge to dismiss consumer lawsuits accusing the Ray-Ban maker of monopolizing markets for designer frames and prescription lenses, causing customers to pay higher prices.

In her ruling, U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil said the consumers had not plausibly shown that EssilorLuxottica has sufficient market power to control prices or exclude competition for custom lenses.

The judge also said the consumers had not properly defined product markets, a key threshold issue in antitrust litigation.

EssilorLuxottica owns major retail outlets including LensCrafters, Sunglass Hut and For Eyes, and also popular eyewear brands such as Persol, Oliver Peoples, and Oakley. The company licenses the rights to sell and manufacture other brands such as Ralph Lauren, Chanel, Prada and Coach.

“It is not illegal for a business to be enormous, and enormously successful, so long as it does not engage in anticompetitive conduct,” Vyskocil wrote.

EssilorLuxottica and its lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Attorneys for the plaintiffs either declined to comment or did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A series of lawsuits filed in 2023 and later consolidated in Manhattan alleged EssilorLuxottica used serial acquisitions of rivals and restrictive sales and distribution agreements to unlawfully dominate markets for eye products.

Two related lawsuits sought class action status for buyers who purchased products from EssilorLuxottica and related business entities and who indirectly bought items through third-parties such as optometrists.

EssilorLuxottica had denied the allegations, and said that it and its affiliated companies operated in a highly competitive industry.

In a court filing, EssilorLuxottica said the allegations amounted to “nothing more than a contention that building a successful company over many decades is unlawful.” The company said that effort “is not an antitrust violation; it is good business.”

The case is In re Eyewear Antitrust Litigation, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 1:24-cv-04826.

For direct purchasers: Daniel Gustafson of Gustafson Gluek; David Cialkowski of Zimmerman Reed; Heidi Silton of Lockridge Grindal Nauen; and Alec Schultz of Hilgers Graben

For indirect purchasers: Rick Paul and Laura Fellows of Paul

For defendants: Chris Yates, Belinda Lee and Lawrence Buterman of Latham & Watkins

​