Tag: Nonmerger

Displaying 1 - 20 of 381 results.

Pages

The Federal Trade Commission has held that 1-800 Contacts, the nation’s largest online retailer of contact lenses, unlawfully entered into a web of anticompetitive agreements with rival online contact lens sellers.
A Texas company that provides therapist staffing services to home health agencies, its owner, and the former owner of a competing staffing company have agreed to settle FTC charges that they agreed to reduce pay rates for therapists and invited other competitors to collude on the rates.
Federal Trade Commission Chairman Joe Simons issued the following statement regarding the decision by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in the case FTC v. AbbVie. The court ruled that AbbVie used sham litigation to illegally maintain its monopoly over the testosterone...
The Federal Trade Commission has filed an amicus brief in Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. v Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc., which is a patent infringement case pending before the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.
Brief of the Federal Trade Commission urging the District of New Jersey to reject argument that Hatch-Waxman patent infringement suits are categorically exempt from antitrust scrutiny as potential sham litigation, because the argument is contrary to the statutory text and case law...
Following a public comment period, the Federal Trade Commission has approved a negotiated final order that prohibits Oregon Lithoprint Inc. from making or attempting to make any agreement to refuse publication of legal notices or to allocate customers who wish to publish these notices.
Oregon Lithoprint Inc., owner of the News-Register, a twice-weekly community newspaper based in Yamhill, Oreg., has agreed to settle FTC charges that it invited a competitor to collude in an arrangement to divide the market for placement of foreclosure notices.
The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint against the nation’s three largest dental supply companies alleging that they violated U.S. antitrust laws by conspiring to refuse to provide discounts to or otherwise serve buying groups representing dental practitioners.

Pages