News & Analysis as of

Department of Justice (DOJ) Per Se Rule

Dunlap Bennett & Ludwig PLLC

Bid-Rigging Or Valid Business Strategy? A Lesson For Government Contract Manufacturers Facing Antitrust Prosecution

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

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

Conspiracy Theories Newsletter, 2024 Edition: Eight Predictions for the Future of Cartel Enforcement

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

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Quarterly Cartel Catch-Up: What to Watch in 2024

The year 2023 ended with a bang in the cartel space, with a federal court of appeals upending what was long believed to be the scope of conduct that should be considered per se under the Sherman Act. The new year, 2024,...more

Hogan Lovells

DOJ lays out per se theory of liability for price fixing using algorithms

Hogan Lovells on

In recent court filings and public comments, the Department of Justice Antitrust Division (“DOJ” or “the Division”) has stated that price fixing using algorithmic software is per se illegal under the antitrust laws. These...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Fresh Off the Grill: No-Poach Agreements May Lead to Per Se Antitrust Liability, Says 7th Circuit

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

Jenner & Block

Client Alert: Acquittal of Aerospace Employees Marks the Department of Justice’s Fourth, and Most Damaging, Criminal No-Poach Loss

Jenner & Block on

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

McDermott Will & Emery

DOJ’s Labor Market Prosecution Against Aerospace Employees Dismissed; Alleged Market Allocation Not Within Per Se Rule

On April 28, 2023, a US District Court for the District of Connecticut judge dismissed the US Department of Justice’s (DOJ) criminal non-solicitation case against six aerospace industry employees, acquitting all the...more

Kerr Russell

Why the Antitrust Laws Are Important in Dentistry

Kerr Russell on

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

McDermott Will & Emery

[Webinar] Trial Team Reflections on Win in First-Ever Criminal No-Poach Case: DOJ May Have Lost, But The Game Is Not Over - May...

McDermott Will & Emery on

In July 2021, the US Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Antitrust Division brought its first-ever criminal no-poach market allocation case. The Antitrust Division indicted DaVita, Inc. and its former CEO Kent Thiry on three counts...more

Jones Day

New Law Eliminates 75-Year-Old Antitrust Exemption for "Business of Health Insurance"

Jones Day on

The Development: Congress unanimously passed and before leaving office, President Trump signed into law, the Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act ("CHIRA"). CHIRA limits application of the McCarran-Ferguson Act, an...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Recent Trends in No-Poach Litigation

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

Miles & Stockbridge P.C.

No-poach Agreements Continue to Take Center Stage in 2019

‘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

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

'Titans' of Antitrust Policy Clash Over No-Poach Agreements

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

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

A Fresh Approach to No-Poach Provisions in Franchise Agreements

• The Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) have indicated in the past that they believe that certain agreements between employers not to poach each other’s employees are...more

14 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide