Photo of Ann O'Brien

Ann O'Brien

Subscribe to Ann O'Brien's Posts

Ann O'Brien is a partner and co-leader of the firm's Antitrust and Competition Practice Group. She also leads the firm’s Criminal Antitrust and Cartels team. Ann is based in the firm's Washington, D.C. office.

Contact:Read more about Ann O'Brien

What antitrust enforcement will look like during a second Trump administration is, like antitrust law, complicated. Notions that Republicans are pro-business and therefore will take a laissez-faire approach to antitrust enforcement are outdated and simplistic. During Trump’s first term, antitrust enforcement was far from moribund, blending traditional Republican preferences for deregulation with a populist skepticism toward Big Tech and market concentration generally. This anomalistic meeting of progressive Democrats and conservative Republicans in the antitrust space even garnered a mash-up moniker – the “Khanservaties” – a group of conservative Republicans including Missouri Senator Josh Hawley and erstwhile Attorney General nominee and former Florida Representative Matt Gaetz, who praised Biden-appointed Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chair Lina Khan. Vice President-elect J.D. Vance also provided backhanded praise for Khan, stating, “I look at Lina Khan as one of the few people in the Biden administration that I think is doing a pretty good job.” Continue Reading Antitrust During Trump 2.0: It’s Complicated

The Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division (“Antitrust Division”) recently updated its Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs in Criminal Antitrust Investigations guidance document (“Antitrust Compliance Guidance”). Corporate counsel and compliance officers should seriously consider these updates when crafting and implementing an antitrust compliance program.Continue Reading Key Takeaways from the DOJ Antitrust Division’s Updated Compliance Guidance: It’s Not Just Criminal Anymore

Republican and Democrat candidates alike have promised along the campaign trail that they will work to address the costs of everyday essentials for American consumers, particularly for food. One of the centerpieces of the Harris-Walz campaign is enacting “the first-ever federal ban on price gouging on food and groceries”[1] and the Trump-Vance campaign has decried the rising price of eggs as a byproduct of the Biden Administration’s economic policies.[2] Candidates’ focus on the checkout counter is unsurprising given reports that rising prices are one of voters’ top concerns this election cycle. And while the Consumer Price Index indicates that the current rate of inflation is 2.4% and on a downward trend,[3] certain data show that the price for food has increased by an average of 25% across urban cities in the United States since 2020.[4]Continue Reading Campaign Promises to Address Rising Prices at the Grocery Store Signal Stronger Price Gouging Investigations, Enforcement Actions, and Prohibitions to Come

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 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 (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

In 2019, the Department of Justice created the Procurement Collusion Strike Force (PCSF or Strike Force), a joint law enforcement effort to combat antitrust crimes and related fraudulent schemes that impact government procurement, grant, and program funding at all levels of government—federal, state and local. The PCSF is a constellation of partnerships among the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, multiple U.S. Attorneys’ Offices around the country, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Inspectors General for multiple federal agencies working together to crack down on unlawful anticompetitive activities in the public procurement process. As we have previously discussed,[i] the PCSF has been steadily growing its footprint and focus since its inception in November 2019. Now four years in, the Strike Force continues to add new partners at the Federal, State and global level, boasting of more than 30,000 government officials trained in detection and prosecution of procurement offenses. The Strike Force touts its growing ranks of trained eyes and ears on the ground anywhere government funds are spent. The PCSF is sending an increasingly aggressive enforcement message that should put those engaged with government contracts, federal funds, and procurement officials on high alert.Continue Reading Aggressive Procurement Collusion Enforcement Risk Remains High for 2024

On November 21, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission (“the FTC”) announced its approval of an omnibus resolution authorizing the use of compulsory process for nonpublic investigations concerning products or services that use artificial intelligence (“AI”). Compulsory process refers to information or document requests, such as subpoenas or civil investigative demands, for which compliance is enforceable by courts. Recipients who fail to comply with compulsory process may face contempt charges.Continue Reading AI Enforcement Update: FTC Authorizes Compulsory Process for AI Investigations

The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced last week the advent of a new safe harbor for companies that discover wrongdoing by the acquired business in the course of an M&A transaction. Buyers hoping to take advantage of this avenue for leniency would be well-advised to conduct thorough diligence and act quickly to report any wrongdoing they uncover, as the potential upsides for those who do so may be considerable in light of the DOJ’s new policy.Continue Reading DOJ Announces Mergers & Acquisitions Safe Harbor Policy