Publications

Section Newsletter Articles on Antitrust

FTC v. Actavis, Inc.: Pay-for-delay settlements subject to rule of reason By Kate O’Súilleabháin Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, June 2013 On June 17, in FTC v. Actavis, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court determined that “pay-for-delay” settlements (also known as “reverse-payment settlements”) between drug manufacturers are subject to rule of reason antitrust scrutiny for purposes of determining whether they violate federal antitrust laws.
Recent decisions in Kleen and Fosamax shape the arguments in motions to compel use of predictive coding By Zachary L. Sorman Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, June 2013 Can a party unilaterally impose a discovery methodology on an adverse party?
A warning on the antitrust risks in private equity collaboration By Thomas F. Bush Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, June 2013 A recent decision by a federal district court in Boston, however, demonstrates how easily even well-advised firms can stumble and end up facing a substantial claim of an antitrust violation.
Highlights from the U.S. Antitrust Agencies’ Report on Intellectual Property: How agency policy statements can be helpful to practitioners By Jennifer M. Dixton Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, December 2007 This past Spring, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) issued a joint report concerning antitrust enforcement and intellectual property rights.
The antitrust counselor: The Supreme Court reversed Dr. Miles: Now what? By Mildred L. Calhoun Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, October 2007 The US Supreme Court recently overruled Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons, holding that all vertical price restraints are to be analyzed under the Rule of Reason. In other words, instead of being per se illegal and presumed anticompetitive, all vertical price restraints are now analyzed for reasonableness and their effect on competition.
Minimum resale price maintenance after Leegin By Robert T. Joseph Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, October 2007 On June 28, 2007, in Leegin v. PSKS, Inc., the Supreme Court overruled Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co. and held that vertical prices restraints are to be judged by the rule of reason under federal law.
The role of regression analysis in class certification decisions in antitrust cases By Jeff Dorman Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, February 2007 The combined effects of the massive potential liability presented by an antitrust class action and the prohibition of a cross-claim for contribution has made class certification decisions in antitrust cases virtually outcome determinative.
Should the origination of a vertical restraint be relevant to its legality? By Blake L. Harrop Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, February 2007 Over the last decade, the antitrust laws’ restrictions on vertical restraints have come under increased criticism from both the judicial and economic communities.
The Antitrust Counselor: Robinson Patman after Reeder-Simco By Mildred L. Calhoun Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, December 2005 The Supreme Court appears to be coming to the rescue of counselors who are still bemused by the Eighth Circuit’s astonishing opinion in Reeder-Simco GMC, Inc. v. Volvo GM Heavy Truck Corp.
The Antitrust Counselor: Benchmarking By Mildred L. Calhoun Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, October 2003 The impetus to benchmark waxes and wanes according to the current management theory in vogue at any given time, but regardless of management imperatives, benchmarking always requires significant antitrust scrutiny.