NIL Recruitment Injunction — Highway to NIL Podcast
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 18 - A Deep Dive Into Antitrust Violations and the Procurement Collusion Strike Force
Class Action | Eleventh Circuit Reinstates No Hire Antitrust Claims Against Burger King
Antitrust Conversations: Antitrust Litigation
Antitrust Conversations: Fundamentals of Antitrust Law
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Podcast | Episode 100: Marguerite Willis, Nexsen Pruet Attorney
NCAA vs. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma: A Win for Antitrust Law and College Football Fans
College Sports, Video Games & the Right of Publicity With Guest Michael McCann of Sportico
JONES DAY TALKS®: Alston, the NCAA, and the Future of College Sports
Game On: College Sports, Video Games & the Right of Publicity With Guest Michael McCann of Sportico
Nota Bene Episode 68: The Current Antitrust Enforcement Climate in the United States with Capitol Forum Senior Editor Nate Soderstrom
Nota Bene Episode 29: The Essential Elements of Effective Corporate Compliance Programs with Jim McGinnis
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
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
‘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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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