Federal Trade Commission Supreme Court of the United States

The United States Federal Trade Commission is an independent federal agency established in 1914 by the Federal Trade Commission Act. The agency is charged with protecting consumers from misleading, fraudulent or... more +
The United States Federal Trade Commission is an independent federal agency established in 1914 by the Federal Trade Commission Act. The agency is charged with protecting consumers from misleading, fraudulent or deceptive marketing claims, as well as regulating unfair business practices that undermine the competitive marketplace.    less -
News & Analysis as of

Competition Bureau Releases Draft Updated Intellectual Property Enforcement Guidelines

On April 2, 2014, the Competition Bureau (Bureau) released draft updated Intellectual Property Enforcement Guidelines (Revised IPEGs) for a 60-day consultation period. The Revised IPEGs principally reflect the amendments to...more

Orrick's Antitrust and Competition Newsletter - April 2014

Shanghai High People’s Court Rules That Resale Price Maintenance Agreement Constitutes Monopolistic Agreement - The Shanghai High People’s Court recently made available its Aug. 1, 2013 final judgment overruling the...more

Advertising News & Analysis - March 27, 2014

In this issue: - FTC Seeks Comment on Fair Packaging and Labeling Act Rules - Ink Still Drying on Supreme Court's Lexmark Decision - FTC says Weak Disclosures? Special Effects, Too? Nissan's on the Dark...more

Employment Law

Same-Sex Harassment Suits Yield Sizable Settlements - Why it matters: Same-sex sexual harassment made headlines recently after the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reached settlements with two different...more

State Action Doctrine At The Supreme Court: Take Two

The Supreme Court has a renewed interest in the state action doctrine. After declining to clarify what types of state action are exempt from federal antitrust scrutiny for years, the Supreme Court agreed to hear its second...more

U.S. Supreme Court to Decide When Professional Licensing Bodies Have Antitrust Immunity

The state action immunity doctrine shields private actors from antitrust liability if their activities are actively supervised by a state. But arms of the state itself generally don’t have to satisfy the...more

Federal Court Finds Actavis Applies Only To Settlements Involving Monetary Payments

A United States district court judge sitting in the District of New Jersey has held that only patent litigation settlements involving monetary payments from branded to generic pharmaceutical manufacturers are subject to the...more

Advertising News & Analysis - January 30, 2014

In this issue: - FTC says Agencies Responsible for Clients' Deceptive Ads - Don't Let Product Claims Fly Solo with Other Products - FTC Wants TV to Trim Deceptive Diet Ads - Home is Not Where the...more

"Antitrust and Competition: Nonmerger Enforcement Activity Heats Up on Both Sides of the Atlantic"

U.S. and European antitrust agencies had similar enforcement priorities last year, a trend we expect to continue in 2014. Nonmerger enforcement will continue to focus on intellectual property, financial services and...more

Advertising News & Analysis - January 23, 2014

In this issue: - Former BCP Director Discusses how FTC Picked its Fights - Court Pierces the Veil on Anonymous Online Reviews - FTC Finds Green Diaper Claims Don’t Hold Water - A Warning Letter is...more

Top Stories of 2013: #4 to #6

Reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its seventh annual list of top biotech/pharma patent stories. For 2013, we identified fourteen stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year...more

Clearance: Proskauer's Quarterly Antitrust Update - Fall 2013

In Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc., the Supreme Court, in a 5-3 decision written by Justice Breyer, reversed the Eleventh Circuit's dismissal of an FTC complaint under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission...more

Privacy Monday – November 18, 2013

The month of November is quickly slipping by – this is the time to be looking at the 2014 cybersecurity and data privacy goals and updates and planning ahead. Our selected bits and bytes for this Monday...more

Privacy Monday: October 7, 2013

Despite the government shutdown, the Supreme Court is in for the 2013-2014 session. There are a couple of privacy cases on the agenda. U.S. v. Wurie and Riley v. California - At issue: Separate appeals over...more

“Highly Unusual” Circumstances End FTC Challenge to Phoebe Putney Acquisition

After running the table in the Supreme Court with a unanimous decision, which we covered, and then convincing a district court judge in Georgia to halt further consolidation of Phoebe Putney Health System (“Phoebe Putney”)...more

The FTC Is at It Again

In a move that will surprise almost no one (except perhaps members of the Supreme Court majority in FTC v. Actavis), the Federal Trade Commission has filed an amicus curiae brief with the District Court of New Jersey in In re...more

Antitrust and Competition Newsletter - August 2013

China’s Anti-Monopoly Law: No Longer Just Merger Control? Until this year, China's enforcement activities in the field of antitrust, particularly as these have affected foreign companies, had been mainly focused on...more

Applying the Supreme Court’s Decision in Actavis: Consideration Value Comparisons by Courts Approving Reverse Payment Settlements

In FTC v. Actavis, the Supreme Court held that “reverse payment” pharma patent settlements within the scope of the patent may (or may not) violate the Sherman Act.1 The majority opinion in Actavis explained that Hatch-Waxman...more

Why FTC v. Actavis Won’t Shift the Border Between IP and Antitrust Law

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc., No. 12-416, ___ U.S. ___ (2013), has generated a lot of commentary recently. Some articles have suggested that the decision may expose certain...more

IMS Study Shows Pro-Competitive Effects of Reverse Payment Settlement Agreements in ANDA Litigation

Earlier this month, the Generic Pharmaceutical Association (GPhA) held a press conference to announce the release of a study of the effects of reverse settlement payment agreements in ANDA litigation. ...more

Supreme Court Will Resolve Questions About Obama Recess Appointments and CFPB Authority

As anticipated, the United States Supreme Court has granted certiorari in National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, signaling the next chapter in the challenges that have been raised as to the legitimacy of certain...more

Supreme Court, in FTC v. Actavis, rejects the “scope of the patent” test, holding that antitrust law’s “rule of reason” analysis...

Patent rights and antitrust law contain inherently antagonistic policies: While antitrust law is aimed at preventing monopolies and promoting competition, patent law explicitly rewards inventors with a time-limited right to...more

FTC v. Actavis, Inc. Q&A: Implications for Pharmaceutical Companies

On June 17, 2013, in FTC v. Actavis, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that plaintiffs may bring antitrust suits against so-called “reverse payment” or “pay-for-delay” settlements, under which pioneer and generic...more

Supreme Court Subjects Reverse Payment Settlements to Antitrust Review

In a recent opinion with powerful implications for drug manufacturers, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in FTC v. Actavis that reverse payment settlement agreements can violate the antitrust laws despite the antitrust immunity...more

Supreme Court: Reverse Payment Settlements Subject to Antitrust Scrutiny

On June 17, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a decision that addressed a “reverse payment” settlement agreement between a brand-name pharmaceutical company (plaintiff patent holder) and multiple generic drug companies...more

81 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4