The US District Court for the District of Columbia issued, on September 2, 2025, a landmark ruling in the US Department of Justice’s (DOJ) antitrust case against Google, imposing significant remedies to address the company’s...more
Last month, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed an antitrust lawsuit challenging several hotel chains’ use of AI software to suggest allegedly supra-competitive room rates. Dai v. SAS...more
Following a nine-week bench trial starting in September 2023 and closing arguments in May 2024, District of Columbia district court judge Amit Mehta ruled on August 5, 2024, that Google illegally maintained its monopoly in...more
WHAT HAPPENED - On March 2, 2022, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard Powers revealed that the DOJ intends to investigate and pursue alleged criminal violations...more
On November 15, 2018, the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice settled a two-and-a-half year long lawsuit against Atrium Health, a North Carolina hospital system formerly known as the Carolinas HealthCare...more
Blockchain technology, particularly private blockchains, can provide a technological curtain behind which business transactions occur. Still, any anticompetitive practices that stem from private blockchains are subject to...more
In a 5-4 decision in Ohio v. American Express, the Supreme Court affirmed that the anti-steering provisions of American Express’s merchant agreement do not violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act....more
The Supreme Court delivered a big win to American Express last week, finding that the anti-steering rules AmEx imposes on merchants do not violate the federal Sherman Act....more
On June 25, 2018 the Supreme Court ruled, in a 5-4 decision, that American Express’s antisteering rules do not violate federal antitrust laws. In reaching this conclusion the Court determined that, for two-sided markets like...more
On Friday February 9, 2018, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) Antitrust Division announced a settlement with Henry Ford Allegiance Health (“Allegiance”) of claims that Allegiance and certain other hospitals unlawfully...more
On June 12, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey denied a motion to dismiss a class action against the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) in Talone v. American Osteopathic Association (No....more
A recent complaint charges PepsiCo Inc. with several antitrust violations, including price fixing and predatory pricing in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, conspiracy and attempt to monopolize in violation of...more
The federal antitrust enforcement agencies have trumpeted their preferences for structural, as opposed to conduct, remedies as the solution to potentially anticompetitive mergers. In contrast, State Attorneys General have...more
Apparently when the CEO of Hillsdale Community Health Center, Hillsdale, Michigan (Hillsdale), called his counterparts at neighboring general acute care hospitals, all of the antitrust advice they had received was left in the...more
Together with the State of Michigan, the United States Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division has filed a civil suit against four Michigan hospital systems for allegedly agreeing to limit marketing in each other’s...more
Late last week, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Michigan Attorney General (AG) filed suit against four southern Michigan hospitals, alleging that they secretly agreed not to compete with each other in...more
Patent infringement can be considered anticompetitive conduct under federal antitrust law, according to a recent ruling issued by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. ...more
Plaintiff alleged that defendants, which were affiliates of each other, held patents that were essential for plaintiff to manufacture and market USB 3.0 connectors that complied with a standard adopted by the industry for...more
The worst antitrust offenses involve conspiracies involving multiple actors. Hard-core offenses under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, such as price-fixing, market division, customer allocation, or bid-rigging, require...more