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
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
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
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
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
An important federal appeals court has clarified a key principle of antitrust law in a way that potentially makes it more difficult for an employer to win a motion to dismiss, and thereby avoid expensive discovery, with...more
On July 7, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (“D.C. Circuit”) issued an opinion rejecting petitioner Hecate Energy Green County 3 LLC’s (“Hecate”) claim that the New York Independent System...more
Dionex Softron GmbH v. Agilent Techs., Inc., Appeal No. 21-2372 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 6, 2023) - This week’s Case of the Week, the only precedential patent opinion issued by the Federal Circuit this week, focused primarily on...more
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
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
Almost one year has passed since the Supreme Court’s unanimous antitrust decision in NCAA v. Alston. That well-publicized decision affirmed the District Court’s rejection of the NCAA’s limits on education-related compensation...more
On 25 February the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) submitted a statement of interest in a Nevada State court lawsuit filed by a group of anesthesiologists alleging that non-compete provisions in their employment agreements...more
For the past few years, it seems franchisors have been riding a roller coaster when it comes to no-poach clauses in their franchise agreements. While for a time it seemed as though scrutiny for such clauses might be fading,...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently reversed an appeal of a decision granting summary judgment that an invention was reduced to practice during the term of a cooperative research and development agreement...more
In an important decision on August 19, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Aya Healthcare Services, Inc. v. AMN Healthcare, Inc. affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of AMN, finding that the...more
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
On June 7, 2021, as part of the US Department of Justice’s (DOJ) continuing commitment to prosecuting cases where the government is a victim, a government contractor pleaded guilty to one count of bid-rigging and one count of...more
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
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
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently decided an issue of first impression regarding “no-hire” (or “no-poach”) provisions in commercial contracts between two companies. In such agreements, one company agrees not to solicit...more
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
Joint venture analysis remains an area of confusion in antitrust law. Courts have tended to elevate form over substance, misapply economic principles, and lose focus of the basic purposes of the antitrust laws, i.e.,...more
TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, No. 20-297: Whether either Article III or Rule 23 permits a damages class action where the vast majority of the class suffered no actual injury, let alone an injury anything like what the class...more
In a recent decision, Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc., the Supreme Court of California opened the door for some restrictive covenants between commercial enterprises, but it left alone California law generally prohibiting...more