Last year, we reported on the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) decision to dismiss its only remaining criminal no-poach case and regroup. We advised that the DOJ was unlikely to abandon criminal no-poach cases entirely and would...more
As we previously wrote, the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) April 2023 loss in United States v. Patel, its fourth in a criminal no-poach case, cast a pall over the agency’s enforcement efforts. The following month, the DOJ...more
The Department of Justice (DOJ) continues to pursue no-poach agreements as criminal conduct despite yet another recent defeat, this time in United States v. Patel. In Patel, the DOJ alleged that employees of an aerospace...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
7/25/2022
/ Alston v NCAA ,
Class Action ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
Franchise Agreements ,
Franchises ,
Legitimate Business Interest ,
Legitimate Business Purpose ,
McDonalds ,
No-Poaching ,
Putative Class Actions ,
Restrictive Covenants ,
Rule-of-Reason Analysis ,
Sherman Act
On January 7, 2021, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a grand jury indictment of Surgical Care Affiliates LLC (SCA) and a related entity, which own and operate outpatient medical care centers across the country. The...more
In 2016, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued Joint Guidance for Human Resource Professionals warning that no-poach agreements restricting employee hiring may violate the antitrust...more
In 2016, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) jointly issued “Antitrust Guidance to Human Resource Professionals,” addressing employee no-poach agreements – agreements between two or more...more