US · ongoing · ~6 min read
In re Construction Equipment Rental Antitrust Litigation
2025–present · construction equipment rental
A Chicago judge let an equipment-rental price case proceed against the Rouse benchmark and its customers on September 28, 2026. The parent company was dismissed.
The story
The complaint says rental companies fed nonpublic invoice prices into Rouse nightly.
The software returned high, medium, and low bands that flowed into their pricing systems.
The court dismissed the parent and kept the platform and the rental firms.
Why it matters
Contractors pay these rental rates.
What was claimed
Shared nonpublic prices plus 90 percent adherence is an agreement.
The other side
RB Global's dismissal shows ownership alone was not enough.
What it means for you
Rental rates do not change because a complaint survived dismissal.
Bottom line
The construction-rental benchmark case is live against Rouse and the rental companies.
Timeline
28 September 2026
Parent dismissed, platform stays in
The Northern District of Illinois let price and information-exchange claims proceed against Rouse and rental companies and dismissed RB Global.
Key dates
- Most claims proceed
- 28 September 2026
Formal snapshot
Summary: Renters of construction equipment allege competitors uploaded invoice-level prices to Rouse's benchmark every night and priced inside those bands about 90 percent of the time. On September 28, 2026 the court mostly denied dismissal. Claims against parent RB Global were dismissed.
Regulator / plaintiff argument: Plaintiffs say the benchmark was treated as a pricing obligation, not a optional report.
Outcome: Rouse and the rental companies remain in the case. RB Global is out. There is no trial verdict.
Conduct tags
Laws referenced
- Sherman Act §1 — 15 U.S.C. §1
Companies
Sources
Reader signals
0 reads · synced via local demo storage — add NEXT_PUBLIC_SUPABASE_* to enable shared likes and comments
Comments
No comments yet — start the thread.