Tag Archives: Antitrust settlements

FTC Accepts Practical ‘Failing Firm’ Defense in Ending Challenge of Nonreportable Transaction

Photo of Danyll FoixBy Danyll Foix on Posted in Healthcare, Merger Review, Premerger Notification
The Federal Trade Commission’s recently announced proposed settlement of its challenge of CentraCare Health’s acquisition of St. Cloud Medical Group (SCMG) is doubly noteworthy. The settlement ends the challenge of a transaction that apparently was not reportable under the Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) Act, and the settlement is premised on a “failing firm” defense that infrequently is … Continue Reading

‘Actavis’ Still Raising More Questions Than It Answers

Photo of Carl HittingerBy Carl Hittinger and Mitchell Oates on Posted in Antitrust Litigation, Patents
Nearly two years after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, 133 S. Ct. 2223 (2013), “reverse payment” settlements in patent litigation between brand-name drug manufacturers and potential generic entrants remain a hot topic in the antitrust world. At the American Bar Association’s Antitrust Law Spring Meeting, held in Washington, D.C., … Continue Reading

Don’t Pop the Cork Just Yet—Growing Criticism of Massachusetts AG’s Settlement with Partners Healthcare Just Might Send the Parties Back to the Drawing Board

By Jonathan Lewis on Posted in Government Investigations, Healthcare, Merger Review
After touting a proposed settlement with Partners HealthCare (Partners) that supposedly would “fundamentally alter [Partners’] negotiating power for 10 years and control health costs across [Partners’] entire network,” Massachusetts Attorney General (AG) Martha Coakley is now playing defense trying to fend off criticism of the deal that just might send the parties back to the drawing board.  … Continue Reading

Let The Rejoicing Begin, Or Not—Massachusetts AG’s Settlement With Partners Healthcare Is No Harbinger of Things to Come

By Jonathan Lewis on Posted in Government Investigations, Healthcare, Merger, Merger Review
After almost half a dozen years of investigating Partners HealthCare’s (“Partners”) contracting practices and its proposed acquisitions of two competing hospital systems, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley announced a “final resolution” that she says “will fundamentally alter [Partners’] negotiating power for 10 years and control health costs across [Partners’] entire network.”  But before you run … Continue Reading

Leave My Employees Alone! You Promised You Wouldn’t Hire/Solicit Them

By Jonathan Lewis on Posted in Antitrust Litigation, Government Investigations, Sherman Act 2
With the antitrust class action against Google, Apple, Intel and other Silicon Valley heavyweights nearly in the books ($300 million plus in settlements and millions more in defense fees later), it is time once again to ask what this settlement means for the continued use of clauses in merger and other types of agreements like … Continue Reading

BakerHostetler Lawyers Publish Chapter on Antitrust Trends in U.S. Agribusiness

Photo of Danyll FoixBy Danyll Foix on Posted in Agriculture, BakerHostetler
The 2014 Antitrust Review of the Americas features a chapter, “‘United States: Private Antitrust Litigation,” authored by BakerHostetler Antitrust Chair Robert G. Abrams, Partner Gregory J. Commins Jr., and Partner and Editor of Antitrust Advocate Danyll W. Foix. They write, “The US agriculture and food market has become increasingly concentrated in several sectors and across multiple levels. … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Rules That “Pay for Delay” Generic Drug Patent Settlements Are Not Shielded From Antitrust Liability

By Jonathan Lewis and Lee Simowitz on Posted in Antitrust Litigation, FTC Act, Healthcare, Patents
The Supreme Court has held that the antitrust laws may forbid patent settlements that delay the market entry of generic drugs in return for large payments from manufacturers of competing branded drugs.  The Court’s ruling rewarded the dogged efforts of the Federal Trade Commission to expose those settlements—which the FTC labels “pay for delay”—to antitrust … Continue Reading
LexBlog