Tag Archives: Antitrust Litigation

Join BakerHostetler Partners Edmund Searby and Danyll Foix for Webinar on Ethical Considerations in Class Action Litigation

BakerHostetler partners Edmund Searby and Danyll Foix will present during an upcoming webinar, “Ethical Considerations in Class Action Litigation Part 1: Pre-certification Concerns,” scheduled for Wednesday, June 10, 1:00pm-2:15pm EDT. The presentation is the first half of a two-part series concerning ethical issues prior to certification of putative class action and those that must be … Continue Reading

FTC Failure to Adopt Section 5 Guidelines Still Hot-Button Issue

Section 5 of the FTC Act gives the Federal Trade Commission the authority to take action against “unfair methods of competition.” The act was enacted over 100 years ago, and its legislative history indicates that it was left to the FTC to provide specific content to this broad and general language. However, there is still … Continue Reading

Product Hopping and Antitrust: Mylan Court Dismisses Claims on Summary Judgment, Citing Need to Avoid Chilling Pharmaceutical Innovation

A recent summary judgment opinion from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania breaks new ground in the developing antitrust law on “product hopping” claims. “Product hopping” refers to the practice of changing the form or dosage of a branded drug without changing its underlying composition. Though drug manufacturers often make such changes for legitimate business reasons, … Continue Reading

‘Actavis’ Still Raising More Questions Than It Answers

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

Fit to Be Tied: Appeals Court Redefines Tying Arrangements Based on Bundled Pricing

Corporate antitrust compliance programs often spotlight the dangers of tying arrangements. Those risks arise when a seller with a dominant position in one product coerces its customers by offering that must-have product only if customers buy a second product that they don’t want (or at least would rather buy elsewhere). Tying arrangements are easy for … Continue Reading

“Oh help me, please doctor, I’m damaged”*—What does the Future Hold for Hospital-Physician Acquisitions?

With the ink still drying on the Ninth Circuit’s opinion affirming the Idaho federal district court’s order requiring St. Luke’s Health System to unwind its acquisition of Saltzer Medical Group—a for-profit, physician-owned, multi-specialty group comprising approximately 44 physicians located in Nampa, Idaho—you may ask what the decision means for other providers?  Hospitals considering future acquisitions of … Continue Reading

‘Product-Hopping’ Can Be Snagged Under the Antitrust Laws

The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act, more commonly known as the Hatch-Waxman Act, together with the patent laws, attempt to advance the competing goals of preserving pharmaceutical companies’ incentives to make the staggering investments necessary to bring new, improved drugs to market, as well as fostering lower prices through competition from generic … Continue Reading

The FTC’s Section 5 Authority Discussed in Article by BakerHostetler Antitrust Attorneys

BakerHostetler antitrust attorneys Carl Hittinger and Jeffry Duffy authored the article, “FTC Section 5 in 2014: An Unexpected Attack, A New Frontier,” published in Law360 on December 22. The authors cover the FTC’s push to exercise its Section 5 authority in new areas; ever since Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act was created … Continue Reading

Hitting Below the Belt? MMA Fighters Allege That UFC Has Monopolized the Mixed Martial Arts Game

Throughout their history, professional sports leagues, including the National Football League, the National Basketball Association, and the National Hockey League, have generated high-profile antitrust litigation. The nascent sport of mixed martial arts now looks as if it will join that list, as two MMA fighters have brought a putative class action in the Northern District … Continue Reading

Mushroom Court Ruling Sprouts Controversy on Whether Reliance on Lawyer Advice Maintains Affirmative Defense to Antitrust Claims

A federal district court recently ruled that claims of “good faith reliance on counsel” were not sufficient to maintain a Capper-Volstead affirmative defense to the antitrust laws – a result that may soon collide with rulings by other courts considering the same issue. Several years ago, a Pennsylvania mushroom cooperative, its members, and various other … Continue Reading
LexBlog