U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer dismissed accusations from aluminum purchasers stipulating that Glencore PLC, Goldman Sachs Group Inc., and JPMorgan Chase & Co. connived to drive up the price of the commodity by controlling supply, Reuters reported Feb. 17.

The Manhattan judge dismissed the case as the plaintiffs did not qualify as "efficient enforcers" of antitrust laws, citing their lack of standing to sue because they had bought aluminum mainly from smelters and not directly from the defendants.

The final prices were determined not to be the result of the "defendants' alleged conspiracy," as the smelters' pricing decisions was a big factor in the prices charged to the purchasers.

Engelmayer dismissed all claims by individual purchasers, but said Reynolds Consumer Products Inc. along with two other plaintiffs that had directly transacted with the defendants could still pursue the case.

The litigation started in August 2013, when the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission subpoenaed the defendants and other major metals warehousing firms over allegations of inflating aluminum prices by hoarding the metal and limiting supply over a decade ago. Aluminum prices from 2009 to 2012 had been declining due to sluggish industrial activity amid the global financing crisis.

Aluminum purchasers said that the alleged price manipulation had resulted in higher costs of producing aluminum end products due to higher storage costs and delays in processing orders.

The case was first dismissed in 2014, then again in 2016 when the amended claim was junked over a lack of evidence. The suit was again revived in 2019 after the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan said a federal judge erred in rejecting antitrust claims by direct purchasers such as Novelis Inc.