AGG Talks: Healthcare Insights Podcast - Episode 7: National MultiPlan Litigation: A Guide for Healthcare Providers
Lessons Learned: A Government Litigation Case Study
The Latest from the DOJ Antitrust Division
Jones Day Talks: Game Over? Alston and the Future of Pay-for-Play in College Sports
Jones Day Presents: Antitrust, Collusion, and Blockchains
China's Export Policy Changes After U.S. Antitrust Case
$300 Million Dairy Settlement Will Bring Reform, Lawyer Says
This monthly report outlines key developments in China’s antitrust sector for August. The following events merit special attention: SAMR Suspends Antitrust Investigation into DuPont China: In April 2025, SAMR publicly...more
On May 9, 2025, the Tianjin Municipal Administration for Market Regulation (“Tianjin AMR”) announced administrative penalties against four manufacturers of dexamethasone sodium phosphate (“DSP”) active pharmaceutical...more
The Administration for Market Regulation of Shanghai recently finalized penalties totaling RMB 223 million (approx. $31 million) against three pharmaceutical companies for colluding to fix prices and divide markets for...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently issued a decision in In re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation, reversing a $148 million price-fixing judgment against two Chinese exporters of vitamin C, remanding the...more
In light of the COVID-19 outbreak, the U.S. Department of Justice announced that it intends to hold accountable anyone who commits antitrust violations—by fixing prices, rigging bids, or allocating customers—in connection...more
Saudi Aramco’s slow trickle of IPO-related information continued this weekend, including its goal of setting overall company market value at a staggering $1.7 trillion. The figure, though massive, is still well short of the...more
The DOJ has jumped on board claims made in existing civil class-action lawsuits and is considering criminal price-fixing charges against “some of the biggest American poultry companies, including Tyson Foods and Pilgrim’s...more
In the products arena, it is not every day that foreign law becomes relevant to a domestic lawsuit. When it does, however, it can create confusion and uncertainty amongst the litigants and the court. Although Federal Rule of...more
On 20 July 2018, the new Chinese antitrust authority – the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) – published two decisions sanctioning two ship tallying companies in Shenzhen for market partitioning and price...more
On June 14, 2018, in Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co., the Supreme Court held that Courts are not obliged to accept statements from a foreign government agency on the meaning and effects of...more
The Supreme Court has ruled US federal courts should carefully consider a foreign government’s interpretation of its own domestic laws, but are not required to give it conclusive effect. Key Points - ..The Supreme...more
International dispute practitioners are well aware of the challenges that arise when the substance of foreign law is disputed in U.S. courts. Most practitioners are aware that the question is governed by Rule 44.1 of the...more
The Situation: In Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co., the defendants in an anticompetition matter—who were China-based manufacturers of vitamin C—claimed that Chinese law required them to...more
In a 9-0 opinion delivered by Justice Ruth Ginsburg, the United States Supreme Court last week ruled that the federal courts are not “bound to accord conclusive effect” to a foreign government’s statement of its own law under...more
Rejecting an earlier appellate case that allowed Chinese companies to escape liability in the United States for allegations of price fixing because their government said it was not illegal under Chinese law, the U.S. Supreme...more
Is a federal court determining foreign law required to treat as conclusive a submission from a foreign government interpreting its law? The U.S. Supreme Court confronted this question in a case involving price-fixing claims...more
Alert: The Supreme Court clarified the principles of international comity this week in a ruling pertaining to the long-running vitamin C antitrust class action litigation. International comity is the recognition a nation...more
On June 14, Justice Ginsberg, writing for a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court, reversed a 2016 opinion by the Second Circuit and held that a foreign government’s interpretation of its own law is not binding on U.S. courts....more
On June 14, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., No. 16-1220, holding that a federal court determining foreign law under Fed. R. Civ. P....more
Ten years after the introduction of China's Anti-Monopoly Law, the functions and duties of the three agencies originally charged with enforcing the law's provisions are now unified under the direction of the newly formed...more
On December 9, 2016, the PRC National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) handed down its decision against medical device company Medtronic for having concluded and implemented a vertical monopoly agreement by...more
This issue of Skadden’s semiannual Cross-Border Investigations Update looks at Brexit’s impact on corporate crime and investigations, the U.S. DOJ’s increased use of forfeiture actions with international implications, current...more
The Second Circuit recently set aside a $147 million verdict against two Chinese companies accused of conspiring to fix the price and supply of vitamin C sold to U.S. buyers. In re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation. The panel...more
On September 20, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued its decision in a closely watched dispute over the question of whether foreign companies may be held liable under U.S. antitrust law for price...more
On Tuesday, the Second Circuit in In Re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation vacated a $147 million award against two Chinese companies for engaging in anti-competitive behavior. At issue was how a federal court should respond...more