Antitrust & Competition
Federal and state antitrust laws comprise a complex web of regulations that are difficult for companies to navigate and can have widespread consequences if handled incorrectly. For companies currently doing business or intending to do business in the United States who are concerned about these regulations, the attorneys in Lewis Brisbois’ Antitrust & Competition Practice have the broad understanding necessary to serve as successful guides.
We have extensive experience handling an array of antitrust and competition matters in an efficient and cost-effective manner that exceeds clients’ expectations. Some of those matters include price-fixing, bid-rigging, supply restrictions, market divisions, price discrimination, monopolization, and exclusionary practices.
Lewis Brisbois represents corporate clients in private single-party, multi-party, and class action, treble-damage lawsuits brought under federal and state antitrust laws. We have extensive experience with antitrust class certification issues, consolidation of multi-district cases, and other procedures governing complex litigation in the United States and can do so in a cost-effective manner. Although we seek to resolve matters favorably for our clients at the earliest possible stage of litigation, we are highly qualified to try cases before federal and state judges and juries.
Antitrust Compliance & Counseling
Our main goal is to prevent litigation, and we provide a full array of antitrust compliance and counseling services to corporate clients in order to achieve that goal. We are capable of preparing antitrust audits, assessing and implementing antitrust compliance programs; preparing antitrust compliance policies; conducting in-person antitrust training programs and seminars; designing sales, marketing, and distribution systems; advising clients on pricing and distribution mechanisms; and structuring joint ventures, integrations, and strategic alliances.
Antitrust issues can often arise from the acquisition, licensing, and enforcement of patents and, to a lesser extent, trademarks, while litigation over allegations of patent infringement also frequently raises antitrust questions. Lewis Brisbois’ lawyers have experience with these issues from the perspective of both the patent holder and the alleged infringer and coordinate with our Intellectual Property & Technology Practice when necessary.
Mergers & Acquisitions
Antitrust problems frequently arise in the sale or transaction-negotiation process, so Lewis Brisbois’ attorneys aim to identify those problems early in the process and assist clients with structuring transactions to avoid or minimize potential antitrust risk. If a transaction is reportable under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, we navigate the merger review process on behalf of our clients as cost-effectively and expeditiously as possible.
We are capable of appearing before the Federal Trade Commission, the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, and the various state attorneys general, and we are familiar with the analytical approach in information gathering techniques employed by the federal and state antitrust enforcers. In addition, we regularly assist clients seeking to raise concerns regarding the anticompetitive actions of competing suppliers, distributors, and retailers with the FTC, DOJ, and relevant state attorneys general.
Related Legal Alerts
- January 08, 2019 Supreme Court Holds Threshold Question of Arbitrability Is One of Contract and Valid Agreements to Submit Question to Arbitrator Will Be Enforced
- January 03, 2019 Antitrust Compliance – Proceed Cautiously When Sharing Information
- February 07, 2018 U.S. Antitrust Enforcers Actively Targeting Agreements Between Competitors In Employment Markets That Restrict Competition For Employees
- October 31, 2017 Third Circuit Imposes Daunting Standard To Prove Oligopolistic Price Fixing Via Circumstantial Evidence, But Manufacturers Must Still Tread Carefully When Setting Their Prices
- October 04, 2017 Federal Appeals Court Vacates a $147M Jury Award Based on Comity Principles
- April 10, 2017 15-Month Prison Sentence Reminds That Spoliation Can Be A Crime Resulting In Serious Jail Time
- February 01, 2017 Antitrust & Competition Law Client Alert - February 1, 2017
- January 30, 2017 Reversal of $340 Million Jury Award Shines Light on Evidentiary Requirements to Establish Anticompetitive Conduct
- December 02, 2016 Supreme Court’s Decision Not to Hear Manufacturer’s Appeal of $156 Million Antitrust Award Reinforces that “Refusals to Deal” Can be a Minefield for Manufacturers
- November 01, 2016 U.S. Antitrust Authorities Now Characterize Employee Wage-Fixing & No-Poaching Agreements Between Competitors as Criminal Behavior
- February 18, 2015 Antitrust & Competition Law Client Alert - February 18, 2015
- January 15, 2019 John Parks Quoted in Law360 Article on Upcoming Airline Merger Bankruptcy Trial
- December 07, 2018 Tripp Lake Presents on Smart Contracts at Chinese IP Forum
- December 04, 2018 Todd Seelman Quoted in Legaltech Antitrust Article
- June 20, 2018 Todd Seelman to Join Anti-Poaching Webinar Panel
- May 16, 2018 UPDATE: ITC Opens Investigation into Anticompetitive Practices
- May 04, 2018 Chris Wood Named Chair of CBA Antitrust Subsection
- April 30, 2018 ITC Opens Investigation into Anticompetitive Practices
- November 02, 2017 Todd Seelman to Give Antitrust Webinar
- August 31, 2017 Todd Seelman, Robin Alexander to Give Antitrust Presentation
- May 26, 2017 Lewis Brisbois Advises Estenson in $300M Acquisition