On August 5, 2024, District Judge Amit P. Mehta (U.S. District Court, District of Columbia) ruled in United States v. Google LLC that Google violated §2 of the Sherman Act by monopolizing the internet search engine market....more
9/12/2024
/ Antitrust Litigation ,
Antitrust Provisions ,
Criminal Prosecution ,
Department of Justice (DOJ) ,
Destruction of Evidence ,
Document Destruction ,
Duty to Preserve ,
Electronic Communications ,
Enforcement Priorities ,
Failure To Preserve ,
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
Google ,
Intentional Spoliation ,
Monopolization ,
Obstruction of Justice ,
Popular ,
Sanctions ,
Search Engines ,
Sherman Act ,
Spoliation ,
Text Messages
Last year, we reported on the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) decision to dismiss its only remaining criminal no-poach case and regroup. We advised that the DOJ was unlikely to abandon criminal no-poach cases entirely and would...more
On April 23, the FTC issued its much-anticipated Final Rule banning worker non-competes. The Final Rule targets the Biden administration’s goal of reducing barriers to employee mobility....more
5/3/2024
/ Anti-Competitive ,
Biden Administration ,
Chamber of Commerce ,
Congressional Review Act ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Contract Terms ,
Corporate Executives ,
Employment Contract ,
Exceptions ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
Final Rules ,
FTC Act ,
Non-Compete Agreements ,
OIRA ,
Regulatory History ,
Section 5
After proposing in 2023 to ban nearly all employee noncompete agreements nationwide, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has remained largely silent on whether it will pare back some of the proposal’s more controversial...more
As we previously wrote, the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) April 2023 loss in United States v. Patel, its fourth in a criminal no-poach case, cast a pall over the agency’s enforcement efforts. The following month, the DOJ...more
The Department of Justice (DOJ) continues to pursue no-poach agreements as criminal conduct despite yet another recent defeat, this time in United States v. Patel. In Patel, the DOJ alleged that employees of an aerospace...more
We recently wrote about the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC or the Commission) controversial new Proposed Rule that would largely ban non-compete agreements between employers and “workers.” The Proposed Rule would ban not...more
On Jan. 5, the Federal Trade Commission voted 3-1 to propose a new rule under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act that would largely ban non-compete agreements between employers and employees. If passed, the...more
1/9/2023
/ Employment Contract ,
Enforcement Actions ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
FTC Act ,
Non-Compete Agreements ,
NPRM ,
Proposed Rules ,
Public Comment ,
Restrictive Covenants ,
Section 5 ,
Unfair Competition
Following its repudiation of its prior enforcement regime in July 2021, the FTC on Nov. 10 issued a Statement Regarding the Scope of “Unfair Methods of Competition” Under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act...more
In October 2022, the Federal Trade Commission issued a Public Comment opposing a Certificate of Public Advantage (COPA) for the merger of State University of New York Upstate Medical University (SUNY Upstate) and Crouse...more
Seventeen of U.S. News & World Report’s top 25 universities in the nation recently lost their bid to dismiss allegations of an antitrust conspiracy to suppress student financial aid awards. The ruling by the U.S....more
For more than a century, minor league baseball and Major League Baseball (MLB) have thrived in a symbiotic relationship. Minor league teams affiliate with major league teams for financial support and access to major league...more
In June 2021, the Supreme Court reaffirmed in NCAA v. Alston that antitrust claims under Section 1 of the Sherman Act “presumptively” call for rule-of-reason analysis and that only the rare case merits “quick look” or per se...more
7/25/2022
/ Alston v NCAA ,
Class Action ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
Franchise Agreements ,
Franchises ,
Legitimate Business Interest ,
Legitimate Business Purpose ,
McDonalds ,
No-Poaching ,
Putative Class Actions ,
Restrictive Covenants ,
Rule-of-Reason Analysis ,
Sherman Act
On July 9, 2021, President Biden issued the Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy. According to the fact sheet that accompanied the order, competition in the U.S. economy is in dire straits....more
On January 7, 2021, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a grand jury indictment of Surgical Care Affiliates LLC (SCA) and a related entity, which own and operate outpatient medical care centers across the country. The...more
In 2016, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued Joint Guidance for Human Resource Professionals warning that no-poach agreements restricting employee hiring may violate the antitrust...more
On December 10, 2020, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that a grand jury had indicted the former owner of a therapist staffing company in Texas for a Sherman Act §1 violation. The indictment alleges that Mr. Jindal,...more
COVID-19 continues to spread exponentially, leading to shortages in medical supplies – from personal protective equipment such as facemasks and respirators to ordinarily ubiquitous cleansers and sanitizers. ...more
In 2016, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) jointly issued “Antitrust Guidance to Human Resource Professionals,” addressing employee no-poach agreements – agreements between two or more...more