Julie is a dedicated resource for summer associates and associates who want to sharpen their legal writing skills. She works one-on-one with lawyers and teaches workshops that address common writing challenges. In Chambers Associate, our associates called Julie "an invaluable asset to the firm."
Women in Law Empowerment Forum awarded Schiff Hardin its 2015 Gold Standard in Recognition of Integration of Women in the Firm for the 3rd straight year. Schiff Hardin was one of only eight firms in the nation to earn a perfect score.
CT Financial News
The list is comprised of those attorneys who are most recommended as top lawyers among their peers.
On April 15, 2015, a panel of the 11th Circuit affirmed a decision by a divided Federal Trade Commission that McWane, Inc. violated FTC Act Section 5 with a partial exclusive dealing program adopted to combat a rival.
Antitrust Connect Blog
The Federal Trade Commission's Premerger Notification Office (FTC) has long interpreted Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) premerger notification requirements to cover exclusive licenses as a reportable acquisition (assuming all other requirements are met) if the licensor did not retain any rights to "make, use or sell" under the patent.
Last week, a 9th Circuit panel overturned the dismissal of plaintiffs’ tying and steering antitrust claims in the putative class action of Sidibe, et. al. v. Sutter Health.
Many companies—and the HR professionals and other executives who worked for them—have found out the hard way that business-to-business agreements on compensation and recruiting can violate the antitrust laws and bring huge corporate and personal penalties.
In December 2015, the Department of Justice’s investigation into the alleged price-fixing of internet-sold wall posters resulted in the indictment of Daniel William Alston and his Britain-based company, Trod Ltd.
Exclusive dealing agreements, while common across industries, raise real antitrust issues for companies with arguably high market shares.
In late June, the Federal Trade Commission raised its maximum civil penalties. The new maximums will apply to civil penalties assessed after August 1, 2016, and will include civil penalties for violations that occurred prior to the effective date.
Mark September 26, 2016, on your calendar as the deadline to tell the DOJ and FTC what should be changed, or not, in the Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property.
A lawsuit filed against the PGA Tour by a group of 168 golf caddies was recently dismissed with prejudice by the District Court for the Northern District of California.
Last week, a federal jury in Northern California found that Fiat Chrysler’s U.S. entity did not violate Robinson-Patman’s prohibition on price discrimination with its dealer incentive programs.
On January 21, 2016, the FTC announced the annual adjustments to the jurisdictional thresholds for premerger notification filings under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act (HSR).
A new Executive Order instructs departments to consider steps to increase competition in the economy.
An antitrust lawsuit filed by Run Gum, a manufacturer of energy-enhanced chewing gum founded by two-time Olympic runner Nick Symmonds, was recently dismissed with prejudice in federal district court.
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the district court’s decision in Woodman’s Food Market, Inc. v. Clorox Company.
Last year, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the FTC’s finding that McWane, Inc. had violated Section 5 of the FTC Act via exclusive dealing.
Loyalty discounts are common marketing schemes that sometimes violate the antitrust laws. In this case, the Third Circuit interprets its extensive precedents to provide guidance on the unusual circumstances when these pricing programs are anticompetitive.
For the second time in a year, the DOJ Antitrust Division has sued a set of competing hospitals for agreements not to advertise in each other's territory. Such naked agreements not to compete in this way will always raise serious antitrust issues. Businesses should institute or upgrade compliance programs to avoid such agreements.
Last August, the Federal Trade Commission issued an administrative complaint against 1-800 Contacts alleging that the company’s agreements with its competitors over the use of trademarks in search advertising violated FTC Act Section 5.
Last fall, the dominant hospital in Peoria, Ill. won summary judgment against a claim of anticompetitive, exclusive dealing agreements made by its major competitor.
Today’s General Counsel
On January 19, 2017, the FTC announced the annual adjustments to the jurisdictional thresholds for premerger notification filings under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act (HSR).
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision delivered this week in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California (BMS) reaffirmed the Court’s commitment to limiting state courts’ jurisdiction over national class actions.
Whether dealing with online competitors, market disruption or regulatory uncertainty, companies operating in the U.S. face a host of new and ongoing challenges.
While there is general consensus in the antitrust community that antitrust enforcement should be focused on protecting competition, there is disagreement about how active antitrust enforcement should be.
Antitrust law has always been concerned about certain types of collaboration among competitors – but it has at times acknowledged that benchmarking, joint ventures, and information exchanges can promote competition if done properly.
Prices provide crucial information to buyers and sellers, and so have always been critical to a competitive economy and antitrust law.
Merger review has long been the aspect of antitrust law most visible in the general media – and the run-up to the November election was no exception.
Decades ago, antitrust enforcement officials developed the “9 No-No’s” regarding patents and licenses. The days of antitrust hostility toward intellectual property are behind us, but renewed tension between antitrust and intellectual property policy seems to be growing.