Insights
Search Results
Alerts
9.03.24
Illumina/Grail: EU Court Overturns Below-Threshold Merger Review Policy
On September 3, 2024, the EU’s highest court, the European Court of Justice (ECJ), ruled that the European Commission (EC) had no jurisdiction to review Illumina’s acquisition of Grail, overturning the EU’s revised Article 22 policy. While a somewhat pyrrhic victory for Illumina, as it had divested Grail in June 2024 based on an EC order, many consider the judgment to be a welcome rebuke of jurisdictional overreach.
Alerts
8.26.24
Man vs. Machine: DOJ Files Complaint Alleging Algorithmic Collusion
On August 23, 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and eight states filed a complaint in federal court in North Carolina alleging that RealPage, a software analytics company, coordinated rental prices in the real estate market. According to the DOJ, RealPage did this by collecting nonpublic competitively sensitive pricing and other data from owners, using that data to determine a “recommended” market price through various algorithms, and then sending that “recommended” price back to owners that subscribed to certain software. The DOJ claims RealPage’s service harms the competitive process and ultimately renters in violation of the Sherman Act.
Alerts
8.21.24
FTC Non-Compete Ban Blocked Nationwide
On August 20, 2024, a federal district court in Texas blocked the final rule issued by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that would have prohibited all for-profit employers nationwide from using non-compete agreements with any worker (the Rule) as an unfair method of competition. The Rule was set to take effect on September 4, 2024, and would have required employers to send notices to all current and former workers who had entered into covered non-compete agreements informing them that their covenants not to compete would not be enforced. The court’s decision bars the Rule from being enforced nationwide.
Alerts
8.19.24
Improper Venu Sports: Southern District of New York Blocks Launch of Sports-Streaming Joint Venture Between Disney, Fox, and Warner Brothers Discovery
The Southern District of New York took the extraordinary step of granting competitor Fubo’s effort to preliminarily enjoin the launch of “Venu Sports,” a sports-streaming joint venture between Disney, Fox, and Warner Brothers Discovery.1 The defendants would license their collective sports content unbundled from non-sports programming exclusively to the joint venture while continuing to require competing distribution platforms like Fubo to purchase sports programming as part of a bundle with non-sports programming. Indeed, the court explained that “shortly before the JV was announced, the JV Defendants explicitly agreed to ‘stay clear’ of supporting another platform like the JV for at least the next three years.” In determining that the joint venture would likely substantially lessen competition, the court stated that the defendants’ history of bundling provided “crucial context” for its determination that the joint venture’s market power and structure created incentives for the defendants to monopolize a segment of the live pay TV market. The defendants plan to appeal the ruling.
Press Releases
8.15.24
Ten Wilson Sonsini Attorneys Appointed to ABA Antitrust Law Section Leadership
Contact:
Kimberly Brooks
Wilson Sonsini
+1 212.453.2881
kbrooks@wsgr.com
Kimberly Brooks
Wilson Sonsini
+1 212.453.2881
kbrooks@wsgr.com
Newsletters
7.08.24
European Antitrust Bimonthly Bulletin – May/June 2024
The firm is pleased to publish the May/June 2024 edition of the European Antitrust Bimonthly Bulletin, which breaks down the major antitrust developments in Europe from the past two months into concise and actionable takeaways.
Newsletters
3.05.24
2023 Antitrust Year in Review
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati is pleased to present its 2023 Antitrust Year in Review, which provides an overview of the significant developments in antitrust law, policy, and enforcement over the past year. This report highlights the most critical global developments in antitrust law, policy, enforcement, and litigation over the past year, with an emphasis on those that will have a lasting impact in the years ahead.
Over the past several years, antitrust issues have come to the fore in public discourse, and that focus has been reflected in significant changes in antitrust law and policy and in more wide-ranging and aggressive enforcement activity. This year’s report provides updates in mergers and acquisitions, civil non-merger enforcement, private litigation, and cartels and criminal enforcement.
Alerts
11.30.23
Upcoming FRE 702 Amendment Reemphasizes the Admissibility Bar for Expert Testimony and Courts’ Gatekeeping Role
On December 1, 2023, the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) 702 will undergo several changes designed to reinforce federal judges’ role as gatekeepers for admitting expert testimony. The changes reinforce the preponderance of evidence standard that the proponent of the expert testimony must satisfy to demonstrate the expert’s qualification, the testimony’s reliability and relevance, the judge’s gatekeeping role to ensure the admissibility of the expert testimony, and the requirement that conclusions of an expert cannot go beyond what the expert’s basis and methodology may reliably support.
Alerts
10.27.23
DOJ Sues Analytics Company for Facilitating Information Exchange
In its first enforcement action based on the exchange of competitive information since withdrawing its information sharing guidance earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) Antitrust Division filed a complaint against Agri Stats, an analytics company that compiles, aggregates, and disseminates data among competing meat processors.
Alerts
7.20.23
Draft Merger Guidelines Issued: U.S. Antitrust Agencies’ Proposed Guidance Conflicts with Current Law and Seems Unlikely to Gain Wide Acceptance from Courts
The two U.S. antitrust authorities—the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (collectively, the “Agencies”)—have jointly proposed new Draft Merger Guidelines to replace the 2010 Horizontal Merger Guidelines and 2020 Vertical Merger Guidelines. The Draft Guidelines will be finalized after a 60-day public comment period.
Alerts
7.05.23
Jury Finds Gilead and Teva Did Not Engage in an Anticompetitive Pay-for-Delay Scheme for HIV Drugs
On June 30, 2023, a jury in the Northern District of California found Gilead and Teva not liable in a trial accusing the companies of engaging in an illegal reverse payment to delay generic versions of two HIV drugs, Truvada (emtricitabine/tenofovir) and Atripla (efavirenz-/-emtricitabine-/-tenofovir). Following a five-week trial and two days of deliberations, the jury found that the plaintiffs failed to show that: 1) Gilead had market power within a market that included Truvada and/or Atripla, and 2) Gilead made a reverse payment to Teva to delay the entry of generic competition.1 This case marks the third jury verdict in favor of defendants in reverse-payment cases since the 2013 FTC v. Actavis decision—there have been no verdicts for plaintiffs.2