Supreme Court of the United States Federal Trade Commission

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
News & Analysis as of

Third Circuit Affirms FTC Authority to Police Whether Companies Have Reasonable Data Security

Since at least 2005, the Federal Trade Commission has asserted that it may regulate lax data security practices as an “unfair” business practice under Section 5 of the FTC Act. The Wyndham hotel chain was the first to...more

FTC Issues First Formal Policy on Section 5's Unfair Competition Authority

Although the brief FTC statement is beneficial, the sweeping language contained in the policy statement gives little practical guidance to the business community. On August 13, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued...more

CON laws, COPAs and the FTC: 7 Antitrust Points For The Healthcare Sector

The Federal Trade Commission is on a roll in its attack on what it considers anti-competitive effects in the healthcare industry. And that roll has consistently involved challenging activity that once appeared to be protected...more

Third Circuit Extends Actavis to Reverse Settlement Agreements Involving Non-Cash Consideration - King Drug Company of Florence,...

Addressing for the first time whether reverse settlement agreements involving non-cash consideration merit antitrust scrutiny, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed the district court, applying the...more

Third Circuit Says Actavis Not Limited to Cash

In the first decision by a federal appeals court interpreting the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in FTC v. Actavis, the Third Circuit recently held in King Drug Co. of Florence v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. that so-called...more

That is SO last week - July 2015 #3

There’s just no rest for employment lawyers this summer. We had another exciting week. The biggest news was the EEOC’s ruling that Title VII prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The agency found that...more

SCOTUS Decision in Spokeo Could Have Significant Impact on Data Breach Litigation

Following several significant data breaches in 2014 and 2015, including one reported just last week by the IRS, organizations of all types are on high alert to safeguard against data breaches and to prepare incident response...more

First Federal Appellate Court Holds a NonCash Reverse Payment Subject to Antitrust Scrutiny: Is the Third Circuit's Decision in...

Recently, the Third Circuit issued the first federal appellate decision interpreting the Supreme Court's landmark decision in FTC v. Actavis, Inc.[1], potentially greatly expanding the scope of settling parties in reverse...more

July Antitrust Bulletin

On June 29, 2015, Sysco Corp. announced that it was pulling the plug on its $3.5 billion proposed merger with US Foods Inc. The news comes less than a week after a Washington, D.C., federal judge concluded that the Federal...more

Regulatory Capture Vitiates State Action Immunity

The Supreme Court has ruled that when an oversight mechanism created by a State —here a State Board — is under the control of those it was supposed to be regulating (sometimes referred to by economists as “regulatory...more

Health Care and Legal Services Providers Challenge State Regulatory Boards on Heels of SCOTUS State Action Antitrust Immunity...

On February 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court narrowed the scope of antitrust immunity for state regulatory boards whose members are active market participants in the occupation regulated by the boards. In North Carolina State...more

Health Update - June 2015

Examining Fee Splitting Statutes in the Context of Value-Based Healthcare - Editor’s note: One of the goals of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is to align incentives among provider communities and their patients and...more

Focus on Tax Controversy and Litigation - Supreme Court Decides Maryland v. Wynne and Rules that Maryland Tax Scheme Is...

In This Issue: - Maryland’s Tax Scheme Ruled Unconstitutional - “FTC Generator” Case Update - FSA Rules that Equitable Disgorgement May be Deductible Expense - District Court Upholds Attorney Client...more

Intellectual Property and Technology News (North America), Issue 26, Q2 2015

The Internet of Things: EU vs US guidance - Reports from the European Commission and the FTC on privacy and security best practices for IoT - key issues and highlights... Are IPRs impacting the pharmaceutical...more

Advertising Law - May 2015 #4

SPECIAL FOCUS: The Impact of the Supreme Court’s Octane Fitness Decision on Lanham Act Litigation - For the second time in recent years, a Supreme Court decision in a patent case is having a major impact on Lanham Act...more

Antitrust & Competition Newsletter - April 2015

U.S. Supreme Court Holds That State Action Immunity Does Not Apply to State Boards If the Board Is Controlled by Active Market Participants - On Feb. 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held, in a 6-3 decision, that a state...more

Open Season on Provider-controlled Licensing Boards

In a closely followed decision with significant consequences for state licensing boards and their members, the Supreme Court in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, 135 S. Ct. 1101...more

[Webinar] Health Care Antitrust Trends In 2015: What Is the Government Really Up To? - April 23rd, 12 pm

The Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice Antitrust Division continue to stake out an aggressive health care antitrust agenda — and they have “the wind at their backs.” In important recent decisions, two...more

Antitrust “State Action” Exemption: North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission

On February 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, holding that a regulatory board made up of market participants is exempt from...more

United States Supreme Court Rules that N.C. Dental Board Is Not Entitled to State Action Immunity from Antitrust Liability

In North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. F.T.C., No. 13-534 (2015), the United States Supreme Court ruled last week that the North Carolina Dental Board, which is comprised mainly of practicing dentists, was not...more

No State Action Antitrust Immunity for North Carolina Dental Board: Implications for the Health Care Sector

On February 25, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the North Carolina Dental Board (“Board”) was not insulated from federal antitrust liability under the so-called “state action” doctrine when it engaged...more

Supreme Court Limits Protectionism by State Healthcare Licensing Boards - Boards Comprised of Active Medical Providers Are Not...

The United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in N.C. State Bd. of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, No. 13-534, 2015 WL 773331 (S.Ct. February 25, 2015) makes clear that the anticompetitive actions of state...more

Supreme Court Denies Antitrust Shield for NC Dental Board

On Wednesday, February 25, 2015, the Supreme Court released a 6-3 decision in North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, a case with potentially broad implications for regulation by dental and...more

Supreme Court: State Agencies Controlled by Active Market Participants Must Have Active State Supervision to Qualify for Antitrust...

In a 6–3 decision issued February 25, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States held in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission that if active market participants control an entity—even a...more

U.S. Supreme Court Holds That to Invoke Antitrust Immunity, State Agencies Controlled by Market Participants Must Prove Active...

On Feb. 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a 6-3 decision that a state board with a controlling number of decision-makers who are active market participants in the occupation the board regulates does not enjoy state...more

123 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 5

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×