News & Analysis as of

Antitrust Litigation Supreme Court of the United States Antitrust Provisions

Husch Blackwell LLP

What We're Watching: State Attorneys General Offices in 2025

Husch Blackwell LLP on

As the Oval Office and Congress flip to Republican control, we expect more state AG-led efforts to impact public policy. Shortly after the New Year, we gathered together attorneys from our State Attorneys General team to...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Turning the Tables: Kroger Sues the FTC

In February of this year, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) brought an administrative complaint to block Kroger Company’s $24.6 billion merger with Albertsons Companies, Inc., citing antitrust concerns. On August 19, 2024,...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

Antitrust Judgment-Sharing Agreements Remain Viable (For Now) After Supreme Court Denies Certiorari

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a district court decision upholding the validity and enforceability of a judgment-sharing agreement (JSA) among defendants in an antitrust civil price fixing action....more

Troutman Pepper Locke

EDVA Judge Denies Motion to Transfer Antitrust Action Against Google to the SDNY

Troutman Pepper Locke on

In perhaps the first case addressing transfer of a federal antitrust action to an MDL court, Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Alexandria Division of the EDVA recently denied a motion to transfer an antitrust action against Google...more

Winstead PC

SCOTUS Sets Argument on Case with NIL Implications

Winstead PC on

An important development in the fast-changing landscape of intercollegiate athletics’ name, image, and likeness (NIL) rules may occur, when NCAA v. Alston is heard by the United States Supreme Court in March, with the Court’s...more

Wiley Rein LLP

Third Circuit Sharply Limits FTC Authority to Obtain Monetary Relief as Supreme Court Prepares to Weigh In

Wiley Rein LLP on

Last week, in FTC v. AbbVie et al., the Third Circuit joined the Seventh Circuit in holding that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) was not authorized to seek disgorgement as a remedy under Section 13(b) of the FTC Act –...more

Polsinelli

U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument over How to Apply the Rule of Reason to Two-Sided Markets in American Express Case

Polsinelli on

On February 26, 2018, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in Ohio, et. al. v. American Express Company, et. al., No. 16-1454. This case involves allegations that American Express unlawfully restrained trade in...more

BCLP

Supreme Court to Review Antitrust Suit Over AmEx Merchant Rules

BCLP on

The retail industry should have great interest in a case set to be decided the Supreme Court this term, the outcome of which will affect the terms and conditions of credit card acceptance for all merchants. The Supreme...more

BCLP

Supreme Court to Take Up Rule of Reason Analysis in Two-sided Markets Antitrust Case

BCLP on

On Monday, October 17, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Second Circuit’s decision in Ohio v. American Express, suggesting that the Court may be ready to shed additional light on the “rule of reason” test...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Motorola and the Extraterritorial Application of US Antitrust Laws to Foreign Component Price Fixing Cartels

Womble Bond Dickinson on

Last month the Supreme Court declined to accept an appeal for two related antitrust cases involving an international price-fixing cartel. The cases come from different circuits, one was criminal and the other civil, but they...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

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

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Supreme Court Surprises the Antitrust World with Denial of Cert in Motorola and AU Optronics

Today the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari in two cases, Motorola Mobility LLC v. AU Optronics et al. and Hsiung and AU Optronics Corp. America Inc. v. United States, declining to resolve a closely watched...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

AU Optronics Files Petition for Certiorari with SCOTUS

AU Optronics Corp. (“AUO”) filed a petition for a writ of certiori in Hui Hsiung, et al. v. United States of America on March 16, 2015, seeking Supreme Court review of the Ninth Circuit’s 2014 decision that upheld the...more

BakerHostetler

“Ring my friend, I said you call Doctor Robert, day or night he'll be there”*

BakerHostetler on

The first lawsuit, in what may be a wave of antitrust litigation challenging professional board regulations in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade...more

Proskauer Rose LLP

Supreme Court Preserves States' Power to Protect Consumers But in the Process Blurs Federal Preemption Analysis

Proskauer Rose LLP on

The Supreme Court once again showed that, when it comes to the antitrust laws, the consumer is king. In Oneok, Inc. v. Learjet, the Court was asked to decide where state antitrust laws end and federal regulation begins. The...more

King & Spalding

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

King & Spalding on

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

Epstein Becker & Green

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

Epstein Becker & Green on

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

McGuireWoods LLP

Supreme Court Denies Antitrust Shield for NC Dental Board

McGuireWoods LLP on

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

Perkins Coie

Supreme Court Strikes Down State Professional Boards’ Antitrust Immunity

Perkins Coie on

In a ruling with significant implications for state professional licensing boards and their members, on February 25, 2015, the United States Supreme Court found that practitioner-controlled state boards do not have inherent...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Supreme Court Finds that Regulatory Boards Composed of “Active Market Participants” are Subject to Antitrust Laws if Not Actively...

Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC, finding that North Carolina’s state board of dental examiners was subject to antitrust scrutiny under the Sherman Act...more

Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr LLP

Supreme Court rules that state professional boards must be actively supervised to avoid federal antitrust scrutiny

The U.S. Supreme Court, on February 25, 2015, reaffirmed that state professional boards controlled by same-profession individuals which are not "actively supervised" do not enjoy Parker v. Brown-based state action immunity...more

Maynard Nexsen

Supreme Court Reviews Agency Comprised of Dental Professionals in State Action Case: Health Care Antitrust Cases to Watch in 2015

Maynard Nexsen on

Federal and state courts are expected to rule on several nationally watched antitrust health care cases during the first half of 2015. As we enter into the first week of the New Year, Nexsen Pruet associate Rachel...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

"Cases to Watch in the 2014-15 Supreme Court Term"

The Supreme Court will begin its new term on Monday, October 6, 2014. Although the Court has not yet accepted for review any headline-grabbing cases of the type we’ve seen in recent years in such areas as campaign finance,...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

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

Foley & Lardner LLP

New York State Adopts First Post-Phoebe Putney Law Extending State Antitrust Immunity to a Public Hospital — How It Came About and...

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On October 24, 2013, Governor Andrew Cuomo signed what we believe is the first post-Phoebe Putney statute (see FTC v. Phoebe Putney Health Sys., Inc., 133 S. Ct. 1003 (2013)), extending the State’s antitrust immunity to...more

25 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