PITTSBURGH — A federal lawsuit related to the $14.9 billion merger between Japan’s Nippon Steel and U.S. Steel has been dismissed in the Western District Court of Pennsylvania. The dismissal came after both sides filed a notice on September 3, signaling the end of litigation that accused Cleveland-Cliffs and its executives of engaging in anti-competitive practices in the steel industry.
The lawsuit, initiated in January 2025, claimed that Cleveland-Cliffs, its CEO Lourenco Goncalves, and the president of the United Steelworkers International, David McCall, conspired to undermine U.S. Steel’s competitive position. The suit alleged that the tactics employed by the defendants could force U.S. Steel into a merger with Cleveland-Cliffs or risk severe harm to its business.
In a statement following the dismissal, Goncalves emphasized the ruling’s clarity, noting it was dismissed with prejudice without any financial settlements. “We remain fully focused on advancing our steelmaking leadership in North America,” he said.
As part of the court’s ruling, each party will bear its own legal expenses. The original complaint highlighted that Cliffs’ actions were aimed at monopolizing critical markets, which purportedly led to billions in damages for Nippon and U.S. Steel.
The merger between U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel, finalized on June 18, 2025, faced significant scrutiny. It was temporarily blocked by former President Joe Biden due to national security concerns before approval was granted by President Donald Trump.
Projected to create over 100,000 jobs in the U.S., the partnership entails an $11 billion investment commitment from Nippon Steel through 2028, including plans for a major project of strategic interest to the American steel industry post-2028. The merger ensures that U.S. Steel retains its name and headquarters in Pittsburgh while continuing operations in the United States.
Before the lawsuit was dismissed, U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel expressed intentions to advance the litigation. However, efforts from Cleveland-Cliffs and the steelworkers leader to get the case thrown out were deemed persuasive, especially after a status conference on July 23. Judge Marilyn Horan pointed out that some of the original issues might no longer be relevant due to the recent merger.
Despite the ruling in favor of Cleveland-Cliffs, the judge left the door open for U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel to potentially revise their complaint. However, no such motions were filed within the allotted 45 days.
This legal development marks a significant milestone in the evolving landscape of the steel industry, which has been undergoing reorganization and consolidation amid fluctuating market demands and regulatory environments.
This article was automatically generated, and while it aims for accuracy, the information may not be entirely reliable. For any removals, corrections, or retractions, please email contact@publiclawlibrary.org.