THE PER SE RULE AGAINST HARD-CORE ANTITRUST VIOLATIONS: ETCHED IN STONE OR ENDANGERED SPECIES?
 
                                
Last year, the District Court for the District of Utah held that the rule of reason governed a criminal antitrust prosecution by the Department of Justice, filed against a company that allocated customers with a competitor. This trial level ruling is on appeal to the Tenth Circuit. The Court of Appeals’ decision could significantly affect both criminal and civil antitrust actions. This article addresses the pending case and appeal, and also discusses other recent DOJ enforcement actions, which the DOJ has filed as civil, rather than criminal, Sherman Act violations. The article further addresses whether these recent DOJ cases may be diluting the message that per se treatment has, traditionally, conveyed.
Featured News
    FTC Pushes Review of CoStar’s Commercial Real Estate Antitrust Case
    Jan 31, 2024 by
        CPI    
    UK’s CMA Investigates Ardonagh’s Atlanta Group and Markerstudy Merger
    Jan 31, 2024 by
        CPI    
    Greenberg Traurig Grow Financial Regulatory and Compliance Practice
    Jan 31, 2024 by
        CPI    
    Dutch Regulator Fines Uber €10 Million for Privacy Violations
    Jan 31, 2024 by
        CPI    
    DOJ Investigates AI Competition, Eyes Microsoft’s OpenAI Deal: Bloomberg
    Jan 31, 2024 by
        CPI    
Antitrust Mix by CPI
    Antitrust Chronicle® – The Rule(s) of Reason
    Jan 29, 2024 by
        CPI    
    Evolving the Rule of Reason for Legacy Business Conduct
    Jan 29, 2024 by
        CPI    
    The Object Identity
    Jan 29, 2024 by
        CPI    
    In Praise of Rules-Based Antitrust
    Jan 29, 2024 by
        CPI    
    The Future of State AG Antitrust Enforcement and Federal-State Cooperation
    Jan 29, 2024 by
        CPI