Earlier this week, in Colindres v. Battle, et al., No. 15-CV-2843 (N.D. Ga.), the District Court for the Northern District of Georgia refused to dismiss antitrust claims brought by the owner of a teeth-whitening company...more
Antitrust practitioners, enforcers and industry professionals came together in Washington, D.C. for the 64th installment of the ABA Section of Antitrust Law's annual Spring Meeting. The Spring Meeting provides a look at the...more
Until recently, actions by state medical boards, operating pursuant to a state legislative mandate, were generally thought to be insulated from federal antitrust scrutiny by virtue of the state-action exemption. That changed,...more
A Publication from Epstein Becker Green and The ERISA Industry Committee Epstein Becker Green and The ERISA Industry Committee (“ERIC”) are pleased to release the current issue of the Benefits Litigation Update...more
Let me stipulate that trying to evaluate a Supreme Court nominee based on a 30-year old law review article is a bad idea. That said, some of the issues that Obama nominee Merrick Garland wrote about in the mid-1980s are...more
The United States has a strong tradition of professional self-regulation, particularly in the learned professions. States frequently delegate regulatory authority to state boards largely comprised of professionals actively...more
In a notice of appeal filed on January 8, 2016, the Texas Medical Board appealed the Western District of Texas’s ruling that the Texas Medical Board was not entitled to state action immunity in an antitrust suit involving...more
With 2015 in the books, we are pleased to reflect on some of the major developments over the past year in the field of health law. The year was marked by changes in Medicare payment models—from government pronouncements...more
A federal district court denied the Texas Medical Board’s (the Board) motion to dismiss an antitrust suit filed by a telemedicine company (Teladoc), finding that the Board is not entitled to state action immunity because its...more
Best Practices for Using Social Media in Healthcare: Maximizing Impact, Mitigating Risk - Editor's note: In a generation more likely to seek health information online than see a doctor, social media is playing an...more
In the latest development from a number of antitrust lawsuits filed against state regulatory boards, LegalZoom.com Inc. signed a consent agreement with the North Carolina State Bar (State Bar) to settle a $10.5 million...more
Earlier this year, we covered the Supreme Court’s decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC, which held that a state regulatory board composed of “active market participants” was not immune to federal...more
In North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC, 135 S. Ct. 1101 (2015), the Supreme Court held that the North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners (“Board”), a state agency, was not exempt from federal antitrust laws...more
In a recent opinion, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that an economic regulation passed by a state agency solely to protect one group from competition would not violate the...more
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
As the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2014-15 term draws to a conclusion, the Court has resolved — or will resolve in a matter of days — several cases with potentially wide-reaching implications for a range of important policy and...more
On February 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court narrowed the scope of antitrust immunity for state regulatory boards whose members are active market participants in the occupation regulated by the boards. In North Carolina State...more
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
In a closely followed decision with significant consequences for state licensing boards and their members, the Supreme Court in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, 135 S. Ct. 1101...more
The Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice Antitrust Division continue to stake out an aggressive health care antitrust agenda — and they have “the wind at their backs.” In important recent decisions, two...more
On February 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, holding that a regulatory board made up of market participants is exempt from...more
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
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
The United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in N.C. State Bd. of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, No. 13-534, 2015 WL 773331 (S.Ct. February 25, 2015) makes clear that the anticompetitive actions of state...more