A U.S. federal court has declined to dismiss a lawsuit alleging price-fixing among containerboard and packaging producers. Several companies, including Cascades, remain defendants, although the court has not determined their liability.
In a September 4 ruling, Judge Mary M. Rowland of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois denied the defendants’ joint motion to dismiss, along with separate motions filed by Packaging Corporation of America (PCA) and Pratt Industries. The ruling allows the case to proceed beyond a preliminary stage and lifts the stay on discovery.
Artuso Pastry Foods Corp. filed the lawsuit on July 29, 2025, alleging conduct beginning November 1, 2020. The company seeks to represent buyers that purchased the covered products directly from the defendants in the United States and its territories. The case concerns containerboard, including linerboard and corrugating medium, as well as certain finished packaging products, including corrugated boxes.
According to Lowey Dannenberg, counsel for the plaintiff, Artuso alleges that producers coordinated multiple increases that raised prices by more than 30%. That figure remains an allegation by the plaintiff.
Allegations meet the plausibility threshold
At this stage, the court must determine whether the facts alleged in the complaint support a plausible claim of an unlawful agreement. It does not yet decide whether disputed allegations are true or whether the companies are liable.
Rowland found that the complaint describes six rounds of price increases in sufficient detail, alleging identical or closely aligned amounts and timing among several producers. She also considered the concentrated market structure and other circumstances cited by the plaintiff.
The defendants offered economic explanations, including stronger demand during the pandemic and changes in input costs, particularly recovered corrugated cardboard. The judge concluded, however, that those explanations were insufficient at this stage to rule out the plausibility of the alleged agreement.
In its quarterly report for the period ended March 31, 2026, International Paper stated that it intended to defend itself robustly. The company said it was too early to predict the outcome or reasonably estimate any potential liability.
What the ruling does not establish
The ruling draws a distinction concerning mill closures and capacity reductions described in the complaint. Those allegations were insufficient to support a separately plausible agreement to restrict production involving all defendants. The judge nevertheless considered them as circumstances that could support the alleged price-fixing agreement.
Market concentration also provides context but cannot, on its own, support the claim of an agreement. According to allegations summarized in the ruling, the defendants collectively control at least 85% of the market for the covered products.
Ten entities remain defendants
The defendants include International Paper, Georgia-Pacific, Greif, PCA, Pratt Industries, Smurfit Kappa North America and WestRock CP, along with three Cascades entities: Cascades Inc., Cascades USA Inc. and Cascades Holding US, Inc.
The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed Graphic Packaging International and Smurfit WestRock plc from the lawsuit in 2025. Smurfit Kappa North America and WestRock CP remain defendants.
The defendants must answer the complaint by September 29. The parties must then submit a joint status report proposing a discovery schedule by October 5.
