MINNEAPOLIS — Consumer indirect purchaser plaintiffs sought preliminary approval of the fifth settlement in a multidistrict pork price-fixing antitrust suit on May 15. In the settlement, Clemens Food Group agreed to pay $13.5 million, which would bring total recovery from the lawsuit to approximately $123 million.

Additionally, Clemens agreed to assist the group of consumers with the admission of up to 50 documents at the trial.

Previous settlements included $20 million from JBS, $75 million from Smithfield Foods, $4.5 million from Hormel Foods and $10 million from Seaboard Foods.

The plaintiffs alleged that “pork processors stabilized the price and supply of pork during the class period through the use of Agri Stats reports, the culling of herds and the use of exports,” according to court documents.

The suit dates back to 2019 and names Clemens, JBS, Smithfield, Hormel, Seaboard Foods, Triumph Foods and Tyson Foods as the major pork processors that allegedly engaged in a conspiracy to inflate prices with the aid of data from Agri Stats.

According to the plaintiffs’ claim, the processors’ conspiracy began as early as 2009.

On April 28, several of the defendants, including Tyson Foods, Smithfield, Clemens, Seaboard Foods, Triumph and Agri Stats, filed for a recusal of US District Judge John Tunheim’s recent Daubert and summary judgment opinions.

In their filing, the defendants argued that the court rulings were biased, alleging that one of the law clerks demonstrated potential conflicts of interest.

The alleged conflicts of interest included the clerk working for three different firms suing protein companies for antitrust violations based on Agri Stats, a pending employment offer from one of the leading plaintiff firms, and a social media post identifying the case. Furthermore, according to the motion, the clerk “publicly embraced” the plaintiffs’ attorneys in the courtroom immediately following the oral argument on the Daubert motions.

“The bell cannot be unrung,” the defendants wrote in their motion. “That is especially so in this high-profile litigation involving tens of millions of purchasers that threatens devastating consequences for the pork industry.”