Category Archives: Uncategorized

DOJ Launches Antitrust Investigation Into Pressure Pumping Services Market

The U.S. Department of Justice has opened an antitrust investigation into the market for pressure pumping services used in hydraulic fracturing.  Pressure pumping is the process of pumping water and other fluids into a well to break up rock formations and increase the well’s oil or gas production.  Two of the companies that received civil investigative demands […]

Google Competitors Express Concern about the Company’s Application for Domain Names

Several of Google’s competitors have lodged complaints with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers urging it to reject Google’s applications for domain names such as “.search.”; .fly”; and “.map,”  Similar complaints were previously lodged when Amazon.com Inc. sought the domain name “.book.”  FairSearch.org — a group that includes Microsoft Corp., Expedia Inc. and […]

Taxi Monopolization Claims Dimissed, But Merger Claims to Move Forward

In Association of Taxicab Operators USA et al. v. Yellow Checker Cab Co. of Dallas/Fort Worth Inc. et al., Northern District of Texas Judge David C. Godbey dismissed price-fixing and predatory pricing claims against several defendants, but denied the a defendant’s request for antitrust immunity and let some merger and price fixing claims move forward. […]

Catheter Class Action Dismissal Affirmed on Appeal

Update August 2011: The Eighth Circuit has denied rehearing en banc. Update June 2011: In a divided decision, the Eighth Circuit on rehearing affirmed its decision upholding summary judgment for CR Bard on the ground that the plaintiff failed to allege sufficiently a relevant sub-market. Update October 2010: The Eighth Circuit panel has agreed to […]

Canadian Competition Authority Challenges Visa & MasterCard Merchant Rules

The Canadian Competition Bureau filed an application with the Competition Tribunal seeking to stop Visa Canada Corp. and MasterCard International Inc. from enforcing agreements restraining competition on the fees that merchants pay to accept credit cards.  Visa and MasterCard rules allegedly block retailers from encouraging customers to use cash or debit cards, which carry lower acceptance fees, instead […]

Exclusive Tire Deal For Racing Organization Not Anticompetitive

Update July 2010: The Third Circuit has affirmed holding that “[t]he Sherman Act does not forbid sanctioning bodies and other sports-related organizations from freely (i.e., without any coercion or improper interference) adopting exclusive equipment requirements, so long as such organizations otherwise possess, in good faith, sufficient pro-competitive or business justifications for their actions.”  The court […]

News

April 2009:  The Federal Trade Commission has issued proposed new merger guidelines for public comment.  The proposed guidelines may be viewed here: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2010/04/100420hmg.pdf. September 2009: The Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, and the Federal Trade Commission have announced that they are reviewing the horizontal merger guidelines and are likely to make changes in the coming […]

Subclasses Certified in Toys R Us Litigation

In McDonough et al. v. Toys R Us et al., Eastern Pennsylvania Judge Anita Brody certified five consumer subclasses, allowing purchasers of various baby products to proceed with the Sherman Act claims against Toys R Us and five baby-product manufacturers, including Baby Bjorn AB and Britax Child Safety Inc.  The original complaint alleged that Babies R Us […]

EC Issues Report on Drug Patenting Issues

On the heals of the DOJ’s recent tough stance against reverse payment suits, the EC has issued a major report on drug patent issues.  Although it backs off tough earlier rhetoric against the industry and places some blame for delay on EU regulation, the Commission also cites patent suits and settlements as the cause of delay.  […]

FTC Investigates Drug Company Merger

The Federal Trade Commission has issued a second request delaying the proposed $41.1 billion merger between Merck & Co. Inc. and Schering-Plough Corp.