Price-fixing agreements among horizontal competitors raise significant antitrust concerns under Section 1 of the Sherman Act....more
Violations of the Sherman Act generally require a demonstration of market power in the “relevant market.” The relevant market has two components—the relevant product market and the relevant geographic market....more
Section 1 of the Sherman Act prohibits any “contract, combination ... or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce.” As a result, in order to establish a viable claim under this section, there must be factual evidence of...more
Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, prohibits “every contract, combination … or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce.” Determining whether such a “contract, combination … or conspiracy” (i.e., the agreement...more
Unlawful tying involves an agreement between a buyer and a seller whereby the seller conditions the sale of a good or service in one market (the “tying” product) upon the buyer’s agreement to buy a second good or service (the...more
A violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act requires an agreement between two or more separate economic entities. In Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp., 467 U.S. 752 (1984), the Supreme Court of the United States...more
Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a)(1), provides the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) with broad authority to address “unfair methods of competition.” Although Congress chose not to define the...more
Until closing, parties to a merger, acquisition, or similar transaction must remain independent competitors. Failure to do so is known as “gun jumping” and can be a simultaneous violation of the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust...more
On August 13, 2015, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”), by a 4-1 vote, approved a bipartisan “Statement of Enforcement Principles” (“Statement of Enforcement”),[1] which purports to shed light on the...more
On April 20, 2015, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) announced that Cardinal Health, Inc. (“Cardinal”), agreed to pay $26.8 million to resolve allegations that it violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by monopolizing the...more
On November 7, 2014, the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) reached a $5 million settlement with Flakeboard America Limited (“Flakeboard”), its foreign parents, and SierraPine to settle allegations...more
1/8/2015
/ Antitrust Provisions ,
Civil Monetary Penalty ,
Department of Justice (DOJ) ,
Disgorgement ,
Due Diligence ,
Enforcement Actions ,
Flakeboard America ,
Gun-Jumping ,
Hart-Scott-Rodino Act ,
Health Care Providers ,
Hospitals ,
Sherman Act ,
Waiting Periods