News & Analysis as of

Anti-Competitive Rule-of-Reason Analysis

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

Antitrust for HR professionals

Maybe don’t get a drink with your competitor. These are not easy times to be in human resources. Attracting, recruiting, and retaining talented employees is as challenging as ever. As I have previously written, wages are...more

Quarles & Brady LLP

Seventh Circuit Rejects Dismissal of Franchisee No-Poach Clause Challenge

Quarles & Brady LLP on

In Deslandes v. McDonald’s USA LLC, issued August 25, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit overturned the dismissal of antitrust claims that challenged no-poach clauses in franchise agreements....more

Proskauer - Minding Your Business

Second Circuit Overturns FTC Antitrust Decision Against 1-800-Contacts Involving Trademark Settlement Agreements

Earlier this month, the Second Circuit overturned a decision by the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”) holding 1-800-Contacts violated antitrust law by entering into trademark settlement and related agreements that...more

Jones Day

FTC Notches Win in Fifth Circuit Reverse Payment Patent Settlement Case

Jones Day on

The Background: In the Supreme Court's landmark 2013 decision in FTC v. Actavis, the Court determined that large payments by branded drugmakers to potential generic entrants to settle patent disputes could be anticompetitive....more

Lewitt Hackman

Franchisor 101: Taking the Red Pill on Non-Competes

Lewitt Hackman on

Franchisors and franchisees in California have long conducted themselves based on precedent that voids post-termination covenants against competition in a franchise agreement in California. Recently, a franchisor’s ability to...more

WilmerHale

Unprecedented State Law on Pharmaceutical “Reverse Payments” Goes Into Effect

WilmerHale on

A new California law, Preserving Access to Affordable Drugs, AB-824 (the Act), which is aimed at curbing reverse-payment patent settlements, took effect on January 1. The Act codifies a presumption that any transfer of value...more

White & Case LLP

California's New Reverse Payment Law Departs from Supreme Court Standard in FTC v. Actavis

White & Case LLP on

On October 7, 2019, California became the first state to enact legislation—Assembly Bill 824 ("AB 824")—rendering certain pharmaceutical patent litigation settlement agreements presumptively anticompetitive. This alert...more

Hogan Lovells

Neither fish nor fowl – China's supreme court proposes new framework for resale price maintenance

Hogan Lovells on

In the last week of June 2019 a copy of a groundbreaking court ruling emerged on social media in China – the order by the Supreme People's Court (SPC) in the Yutai case. ...more

King & Spalding

Sixth Circuit Confirms Rule of Reason Analysis Applies to Alleged Group Boycott

King & Spalding on

Premier Health Partners (Premier), a major hospital network in Dayton, Ohio, has won dismissal of an antitrust suit originally filed by a rival hospital. A physician-owned, for-profit hospital filed suit in 2012, alleging...more

McDermott Will & Emery

US DOJ Adds Complexity to Enforcement of “No-Poach” Agreements under Antitrust Law

McDermott Will & Emery on

On Thursday, March 7, the Antitrust Division intervened in three antitrust class actions to urge the court that no-poach agreements between vertically related firms, such as between franchisor and franchisee, should be...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Shifting Enforcement of No-Poaching Agreements

Fifteen months after the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced its intention to criminally pursue no-poaching agreements — in which competitors agree not to recruit or hire each other’s employees —...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Alabama Federal Court Will Analyze Blue Cross Blue Shield Antitrust Claims Under Per Se Standard; Defers Decision on “Single...

A court’s decision regarding the proper standard of review in a Sherman Act Section 1 case—whether to analyze the defendant’s conduct as a per se antitrust violation or under the “rule of reason”—is highly significant. The...more

Knobbe Martens

Supreme Court Will Not Review Pay-For-Delay Case over GSK’s Lamictal

Knobbe Martens on

On November 7, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review an appeal from a Third Circuit decision finding that a settlement between GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (Teva) involving the...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

District Court Narrowly Defines the Relevant Market in Post-Actavis Pay-For-Delay Suit

On August 8, the District of Connecticut issued a noteworthy ruling on how to approach defining the relevant market definition in a pay-for-delay suit. In In re Aggrenox Antitrust Litigation, 3:14-md-02516 (D. Conn.), three...more

Gray Reed

The Peril in Joint Bidding for Properties

Gray Reed on

Wondering what was behind the Department of Justice indictment of the late Aubrey McClendon? The charge was conspiring to rig bids for oil and gas properties in Oklahoma. Read the McClendon indictment and engage in the parlor...more

McDermott Will & Emery

ANDA Update - October 2015

McDermott Will & Emery on

Federal Circuit Interprets Statutory Requirements for Biosimilar Regulatory Pathway - Amgen Inc., v. Sandoz Inc., (Fed. Cir. July 21, 2015): In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

"Shifting Burdens: Structuring a Rule of Reason in Reverse-Payment Cases"

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc. triggered a flurry of judicial activity in relation to pharmaceutical patent settlements allegedly involving reverse payments from patent...more

17 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide