(Podcast) The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently issued a landmark decision that temporarily altered the standard of review for antitrust bid-rigging prosecutions against manufacturers and distributors in...more
2023 was a dramatic year for criminal antitrust enforcement in the United States. The Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) garnered big wins: three convictions at trial,1 $267 million in criminal fines...more
A three-judge panel from the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit overturned an executive’s bid-rigging antitrust conviction, holding that the district court erred in applying the per se standard to the executive’s...more
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
United States District Court Acquits all Defendants in US v. Patel - On April 28, 2023, the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut acquitted the defendants in US v. Patel of the charges of conspiring...more
The various antitrust laws can seem unfair, complicated, and many times irrelevant to the practice of dentistry. However, these laws do apply. The U.S. Justice Department (“DOJ”) and the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”)...more
The Antitrust Division won a preliminary skirmish against two co-defendants who challenged the criminal indictment against them charging price-fixing in the labor market. District Court Judge Mazzant, in the Eastern District...more
Federal district courts around the country continue to grapple with how to analyze “no-poach” agreements — whereby two or more companies agree not to hire or recruit each other’s workers — under the antitrust laws. Beginning...more
‘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
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
A recent decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit is important for competitors involved in joint ventures because it states what mode of antitrust analysis—the per se rule or the rule of reason—applies to the...more
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
In a long-running antitrust case, the Eleventh Circuit recently denied defendant Blue Cross Blue Shield’s interlocutory appeal of the district court’s ruling that certain allegedly restrictive practices of defendants must be...more
We wrote before about a decision by an Alabama federal district court to analyze claims in the Blue Cross Blue Shield multi-district litigation under a per se standard. ...more
In a somewhat unexpected but highly significant move, United States District Judge David Procter (Northern District of Alabama), who is presiding over the In re Blue Cross Blue Shield Antitrust Litigation (Case No....more
Since 2013, the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association has faced a series of purported class actions consolidated in the U.S. District Court in Alabama. In a recent decision focused upon the appropriate standard of review, the...more
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
Editor’s Note: In a recent “Antitrust Practice Group Bulletin” for the American Health Lawyers Association, Manatt Health examined the August 9, 2017, decision by a federal district court to dismiss Sherman Act group boycott...more
On the eve of trial, and after years of litigation (including an appeal to the Sixth Circuit), all claims by Dayton, Ohio hospital The Medical Center at Elizabeth Place (“MCEP”) against Premier Health Partners (“Premier”)...more