News & Analysis as of

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Rule-of-Reason Analysis

Kerr Russell

Why Dentists Must Pay Attention to Antitrust Law

Kerr Russell on

You should also be aware that the U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) historically have been active in the health care industry, with many prosecutions of physicians and dentists for antitrust...more

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

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Fresh Off the Grill: No-Poach Agreements May Lead to Per Se Antitrust Liability, Says 7th Circuit

Introduction - No-poach agreements, wherein companies agree not to solicit or hire employees away from a competitor, have been targeted by the White House, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Antitrust Division....more

Fenwick & West LLP

The FTC Continues to Broaden Its Enforcement Authority to Pursue Chair Khan’s Agenda

Fenwick & West LLP on

On July 9, 2021, just days into her tenure as Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Commission) Chair, Lina Khan led the Commission’s charge to rescind the agency’s 2015 policy statement (2015 Statement) on its approach to...more

BakerHostetler

Decision Benefits Franchise Businesses and Finds Alston Bars Challenge to No-Poach Agreements

BakerHostetler on

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

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

Cozen O'Connor

2nd Circuit Appeals Court Upholds Trademark Settlements As Valid Under Antitrust Law

Cozen O'Connor on

The Second Circuit’s recent decision in 1-800 Contacts, Inc. v. FTC signals that trademark holders can aggressively enforce their rights and pursue settlements with competitors that are not “inherently suspect” under the...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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

FTC Prevails in Reverse Payment Case

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) spent the better part of a decade attacking the practice of innovator drug companies settling ANDA litigation by providing payments to generic applicants challenging the validity of Orange...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

Miles & Stockbridge P.C.

No-poach Agreements Continue to Take Center Stage in 2019

‘No-poach’ agreements between businesses not to compete with each other for employees have long been held unlawful under Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, which prohibits certain restraints on trade and competition....more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

'Titans' of Antitrust Policy Clash Over No-Poach Agreements

Legal battles over the antitrust treatment of no-poach agreements continue to escalate with new district court decisions and new pronouncements from two “titans” of antitrust policy, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the...more

BakerHostetler

The Rise and Fall of Statistical Significance

BakerHostetler on

Dealing with clinical studies can be one of the more challenging aspects of being an advertising/marketing lawyer, particularly if you are one of many lawyers who took the political science/econ route to law school. ...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

A Fresh Approach to No-Poach Provisions in Franchise Agreements

• The Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) have indicated in the past that they believe that certain agreements between employers not to poach each other’s employees are...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

No-Poach Update: DOJ Seeks to Rein In Franchise Suits

Evolving antitrust treatment of so-called “no-poach” agreements continues to offer important guidance for company counsel and human resources professionals. Over the past two years, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Privacy & Cybersecurity Update - October 2017

In this month's edition of our Privacy & Cybersecurity Update, we examine the European Commission's annual review of the Privacy Shield, a potential threat to the European Union's "standard contractual clauses," a push by...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

Latham & Watkins LLP

Narrowing the Gap for the Price-Cost Test: Lessons From Eisai v. Sanofi-Aventis

Latham & Watkins LLP on

For companies that rely on price discounting as a sales and marketing tool, navigating antitrust risk can be difficult. Lower prices always benefit customers in the short run, but economic theory creates room for plaintiffs...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

Butler Snow LLP

Federal Trade Commission Issues First-Ever Guidance on “Unfair Methods of Competition”

Butler Snow LLP on

Section 5 of the 1914 Federal Trade Commission Act declares that “unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce” are unlawful. The Act also empowers the Commission to prevent persons, partnerships, and corporations...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Key Take-Aways From the FTC’s New Section 5 Statement

The Federal Trade Commission’s New Section 5 Statement Preserves the Agency’s “Doctrinal Flexibility” but Fails to Provide Meaningful Concrete Guidance - On August 13, 2015, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

"After Long Debate, FTC Issues Only General Principles Regarding Section 5"

On August 13, 2015, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued formal guidance on Section 5 enforcement consisting of a general statement of principles1 to guide application of its authority to challenge “unfair methods...more

McDermott Will & Emery

FTC Releases Section 5 Guidelines

McDermott Will & Emery on

On Thursday, August 13, 2015, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released a Statement of Enforcement Principles Regarding “Unfair Methods of Competition” Under Section 5 of the FTC Act. The statement was passed by a 4–1 vote,...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

FTC Puts "Standalone" Section 5 Enforcement Approach on the Record

For the first time in its 101-year history, the Federal Trade Commission recently issued a policy statement outlining the extent of its authority to police "unfair methods of competition" on a "standalone" basis under Section...more

Proskauer Rose LLP

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

Proskauer Rose LLP on

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

32 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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