Leading up to the U.S. presidential election this November, our Antitrust & Competition team will offer thoughts and insights into what antitrust enforcement will look like under the next presidential administration. While there is at least some uncertainty regarding antitrust enforcement under either a Harris or Trump administration, there is no doubt that the current Biden administration has been extraordinarily active.Continue Reading Election 2024 Coverage: Examining the Future of Healthcare and Antitrust

Yesterday, August 28th, the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”) and the Department of Justice Antitrust Division (the “DOJ”) (the “Antitrust Agencies”), together with the Department of Labor (the “DOL”) and National Labor Relations Board (the “NLRB”), signed a new agreement (the Memorandum of Understanding or “MOU”) that seeks to enhance the ability of the FTC and DOJ to investigate the impact of mergers and acquisitions on labor markets.Continue Reading U.S. Federal Antitrust Agencies Announce Cooperation Initiative with Labor Agencies in Merger Review

On July 3, 2024, Judge Ada Brown of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas entered a limited, preliminary injunction barring the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) from enforcing its controversial Final Rule (“Rule”) which purports to ban almost all non-compete agreements. Importantly, Judge Brown’s preliminary order only enjoined enforcement of the Final Rule against the named plaintiffs who opposed it. On August 20, 2024 – just two weeks before the Rule’s effective date – Judge Brown greatly expanded the scope of her initial ruling by granting summary judgment for the plaintiffs and ordering the Rule be completely “set aside” and “not be enforced or otherwise take effect on September 4, 2024[.]” Judge Brown’s order may be the fatal blow for the Rule, and should end a months-long saga of uncertainty for employers.Continue Reading Final Word on Final Rule? Texas District Court Eviscerates FTC’s Non-Compete Ban

On July 3, District Judge Ada Brown of the Northern District of Texas issued an order enjoining the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) from enforcing its “Final Rule” against plaintiffs Ryan, LLC (“Ryan”) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (the “Chamber”). If implemented, the Final Rule would effectively render nearly all non-compete agreements unlawful. Accordingly, this opinion was one of the most highly anticipated judicial decisions in antitrust and labor and employment law in recent memory.Continue Reading Not So “Final”? Texas Federal Court Enjoins Enforcement of FTC’s Noncompete Ban, Leaving Future of Commission’s Rule in Doubt

The United Kingdom remains a key European jurisdiction for competition damages actions, also in a post-Brexit world. In particular the number of collective proceedings for competition damages has significantly increased. This is in particular true for stand-alone claims which do not rely on an infringement finding by a competition regulator. Currently there are nearly fifty pending collective proceedings listed on the CAT’s website. Cases relate to both infringements of anticompetitive agreements and abuse of dominance prohibitions and span across a number of industry sectors, including digital, consumer electronics, utilities, financial services.Continue Reading Maturing UK Competition Appeal Tribunal Collective Proceedings Process Sees Uptick in Cases

On June 6, 2024, California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced that he led a multistate coalition of eleven (11) state attorneys general in in submitting a comment letter (the “Comment Letter”) in response to the Federal Trade Commission, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (together the “Agencies”) request for information regarding consolidation in healthcare by private equity. On March 5, 2024, the Agencies issued a “Request for Information on Consolidation in Healthcare Markets,” on the same day the Agencies hosted a public workshop regarding the impact of private equity investment in the healthcare system. Continue Reading California Attorney General Advocates for Greater Antitrust Enforcement in Private Equity in Healthcare

The health care industry has been a particular focus of antitrust concern in recent years, including recent policy initiatives, private equity warnings, and enforcement actions from both the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The new Task Force on Health Care Monopolies and Collusion (HCMC), announced this month by the DOJ, is the latest example of antitrust scrutiny on the industry.Continue Reading New DOJ Health Care Task Force Portends Continued Aggressive Antitrust Enforcement

On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) issued its Final Rule banning employers from imposing post-employment noncompete requirements on their workers (the “Final Rule”). The FTC has indicated that it will continue to prioritize enforcement in the healthcare industry, with objectives seeming to include alleviating physician shortages and improving access to healthcare. What the Final Rule means for healthcare organizations generally, and for nonprofits in particular, is not entirely clear and is likely to be challenged. Continue Reading What the FTC’s Noncompete Ban Means for Healthcare

On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”) voted 3-2 to issue its final rule (“Final Rule”) banning employers from imposing noncompete clauses on their workers, approving the final rule in a special Open Commission Meeting. Continue Reading FTC Votes to Ban Noncompete Agreements

Parties involved in or considering health care transactions in California have been focused on navigating the new rules set by California’s Office of Health Care Affordability (OHCA),[1] and newly proposed legislation could present additional challenges in consummating certain health care transactions, particularly those involving private equity. Introduced in February 2024, California’s Assembly Bill 3129 seeks to curb consolidation in the health care industry allegedly driven by private equity firms and hedge funds. As summarized in greater detail below, the bill would require that these parties obtain prior written consent from California’s Attorney General (AG) before an acquisition or change of control of many types of health care businesses and assets.Continue Reading California’s AB 3129: A New Hurdle for Private Equity Health Care Transactions on the Horizon?

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has filed an amicus brief in Teva Branded Pharmaceuticals Products R&D, Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals of New York, LLC to further the agency’s efforts to promote and protect generic drug and biosimilar competition. In the case, Teva asserts that Amneal’s Abbreviated New Drug Application (“ANDA”) for an asthma inhaler infringes upon five patents it has listed in the FDA’s Orange Book–a challenge that under FDA regulations triggers a 30-month stay of FDA’s approval of the generic inhaler. Amneal’s counterclaims assert that the Teva patents, which relate to the inhaler device and dose counter, rather than the drug itself, were improperly listed and has asked the court for judgment on the pleadings and an order to delist the patents at issue.Continue Reading FTC’s Campaign Against Improper Orange Book Listings Continues with Amicus Brief in Teva’s Challenge of Amneal Asthma Inhaler ANDA