Schweickart Media

Case sources and open records

The primary documents behind the analysis and the evidence still needed.

Research and analysis · Updated November 1, 2026

Primary source reader

Original recordDate and use
DOJ case indexCase 1:21-cv-01880-CJN; public index reviewed October 25, 2026.
U.S. complaintJuly 14, 2021; Document 1, paragraphs 2, 24–38 and Appendix A.
Competitive Impact StatementJuly 20, 2021; Document 8, product and geographic markets and remedy explanation.
Entered Final JudgmentOctober 26, 2021; Document 13. Definitions II; divestiture IV; monitoring X; enforcement XV; expiration XVI.
U.S. monitoring trustee orderOctober 26, 2021; Document 14, one page.
Motion for entry of judgmentOctober 7, 2021; Document 11. Procedure and public-interest request.
DOJ transaction announcementJuly 14, 2021; allegations, announced remedy and international coordination.
European Commission merger decisionMarch 18, 2021; Case M.9820; public version, 359 PDF pages including commitments.
European purchaser approvalJuly 14, 2021; purchaser criteria and paragraphs 57–59; 13 PDF pages.
European trustee appointmentMarch 29, 2021; ING Bank N.V.; one page.
Eaton sale closingAugust 2, 2021; company transaction statement.
Interpump purchase agreement announcementJune 1, 2021; projected business scope and pricing basis.
Interpump acquisition closingOctober 1, 2021; final reported enterprise value.
Kentucky expansion announcementFebruary 1, 2023; announced investment, jobs and production transfer. This is an announcement, not a completion audit.
Interpump Q1 2023 resultsMay 15, 2023; slide 6 / PDF page 7. White quarterly management-reported growth and margin.

What is in this dossier

The source set includes the U.S. complaint, explanation of the proposed remedy, entered judgment, monitoring-trustee order, European decision and purchaser approval, company transaction releases, and the Kentucky investment announcement. Each answers a specific question; a company announcement reports the company’s account, while an allegation states what the government sought to prove.

The October 2021 motion describes the procedure for requesting entry of the settlement. The entered judgment controls the U.S. terms. The settlement’s entry followed a public-interest process rather than a trial of the underlying competition allegations. Motion for entry of judgment

China divestiture and technology records

The public documents establish these transactions and reported rights. A patent-by-patent ownership and licence comparison, and evidence of later competitive effects, remain necessary to resolve the full industrial outcome.

Open records

The docket and monitoring gaps limit what can be concluded about current oversight and implementation. Listing a record here does not mean it has been obtained or that a records request has been submitted.

Source notes

Public versions of European documents contain redactions. The U.S. public case index is a document collection, not a certified complete docket. Company releases record announced or reported events; their forecasts and expected results remain distinct from measured later outcomes.

Our analysis and proposed reporting tests are identified within the chapters. Personal accounts and non-public customer records have not been inserted as verified public findings.

Download the dated source index

All case chaptersPrimary records

Read an obligation differently from an outcome

A useful reading order begins with the question a document can answer. The complaint sets out the government’s allegations. The judgment defines the entered obligations. Closing releases establish reported transactions. Later investment and results announcements describe selected developments. Moving between those records requires keeping their purposes attached.

The remaining investigation is therefore not simply a search for more documents. It is a search for the missing connection between an obligation, an operating milestone and a customer result. A report index or a production acceptance record might resolve a narrow question more effectively than another broad corporate statement. The source list makes those gaps explicit without treating an unavailable record as proof of what it would say.