Monthly Antitrust Update: February 2010 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Monthly Antitrust Update: February 2010 PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 5f953d-YjNkN



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Monthly Antitrust Update: February 2010

Description:

Created Date: 3/4/2010 1:03:36 AM Document presentation format: On-screen Show Other titles: Arial Wingdings ABA Design Template Monthly Antitrust Update: February ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:214
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 36
Provided by: appsAmeri
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Monthly Antitrust Update: February 2010


1
Monthly Antitrust Update February 2010
  • ABA Corporate Counseling Committee March 5, 2010

Presenters Philip Torbøl Joel Grosberg Craig
Seebald Carrie Amezcua Jon Dubrow
2
Topics
  • International Developments
  • Private Litigation Developments
  • FTC/DOJ Non-Merger Enforcement Developments
  • FTC/DOJ Merger Enforcement Developments
  • Legislative Updates

3
International Developments
  • Procedural Issues in EU Antitrust Law
  • Cartel Cases EU
  • Cartel Cases Other Jurisdictions
  • Single Firm Conduct EU
  • Single Firm Conduct Other Jurisdictions
  • Mergers Acquisitions EU
  • Mergers Acquisitions Other Jurisdictions

4
Procedural Issues in EU Antitrust Law
  • Hearing at the European Court of Justice in the
    Akzo Nobel Case
  • On 9 February, the European Court of Justice held
    the hearing in the Akzo Nobel case (C-550/07P),
    the landmark appeal case concerning the question
    whether legal privilege applies to communications
    from in-house lawyers providing legal advice
    within their company and to internal requests for
    such advice
  • The case stems from a cartel investigation where
    Akzo Nobel opposed that the European Commission
    seized two e-mails containing communications from
    one of its in-house lawyers who was a member of
    the Netherlands Bar
  • In first instance, the General Court rejected
    privilege for in-house lawyer communications,
    even where the in-house-lawyer is a member of a
    Member State bar association or is subject to
    professional ethics
  • Advocate General Kokott will deliver her opinion
    to the Court of Justice on 29 April.
  • Antitrust Proceedings before the Commission
  • A public consultation on the Commissions Best
    practices for antitrust proceedings was closed on
    3 March. This issue seems to be a high priority
    for the new Commissioner for Competition Joaquín
    Almunia

5
Cartel Cases - EU
  • Air Freight Forwarding Cartel
  • The EU Commission sent formal charges - Statement
    of Objections - to a number of companies
    concerning their alleged price collusion on the
    provision of air freight forwarding services
  • The companies reported to be involved include
    Panalpina, Kuehne Nagel, and Deutsche Post
  • Four separate infringements involving the
    provision of these services from the UK to
    outside the EEA, from the EEA to the US, from
    China to the EEA, and from Southern China/Hong
    Kong to the EEA
  • EU Commission Dawn Raids Electrical Equipment
    Producers
  • The EU Commission confirmed it has inspected the
    offices of producers of Flexible Alternating
    Current Transmission Systems on suspicion of
    breaching EU rules against cartels
  • ABB and Siemens confirmed that their offices have
    been investigated by the Commission

6
Cartel Cases Other Jurisdictions
  • Bread Cartel in South Africa
  • South Africas Competition Tribunal for the first
    time has imposed the maximum fine that it is
    entitled to levy on Pioneer Foods for its role in
    a bread cartel
  • A fine of 196 million rand (US 26 million)
    represents 10 of the 2006 turnover for Pioneers
    Sasko bread-baking divisions
  • It is also the first time that one of the
    Competition Commissions cartel investigations
    reached the Tribunal for adjudication and the
    first occasion where the respondent decided to
    fight a matter before the Tribunal
  • Later this month, the Commission had concluded an
    investigation into another cartel in which
    Pioneer Foods is involved, but the company
    announced that this time it is committed to
    reaching a settlement
  • First Judicial Settlement over Cartel Fines in
    Brazil
  • CADE, Brazils Council for Economic Defence, for
    the first time executed a judicial settlement
    with fine reduction concerning the crushed rock
    cartel case
  • The companies that settled with the CADE include
    Embu Engenharia e Comércio, Lúdice Mineração, and
    Pedreira Sargon
  • Previous settlements in cartel cases occurred
    while proceedings were at administrative stage

7
Single Firm Conduct - EU
  • European Companies Complain against Google
  • The EU Commission confirmed that it has received
    three complaints against Googles alleged abusive
    behaviour in the internet search market
  • The Commission will now carry out a preliminary
    investigation of the alleged conduct to assess
    whether or not to take any formal action against
    Google
  • Google stated that the complaints were lodged by
    Foundem, a UK price comparison site, EJustice.fr,
    a French site specializing in legal search
    inquiries, and Ciao!, a subsidiary of Microsoft
  • Foundem and EJustice.fr allege that Googles
    search algorithm demoted their sites in Web
    search results favouring its own products over
    those of rivals Ciao! complains about Googles
    standard terms and conditions
  • Earlier this month, Navx, a content provider for
    mapping services, also logged a complaint against
    Google with the French Competition Authority
    Navx alleges that Google abused its dominant
    position by terminating its Adwords contract and
    refusing to display Navxs advertisements

8
Single Firm Conduct Other Jurisdictions
  • Unfair Pricing by Japans Mobile Communications
    Operator
  • Japans Communication Ministry together with the
    Fair Trade Commission is investigating NTT DoCoMo
    Inc. for unfair pricing of cellular phone
    infrastructure to Mobile Virtual Network
    Operators (MVNOs) and misuse of information
    acquired during negotiations for leasing.
  • South African Airways (SAA) Found to Have Abused
    its Dominance
  • South Africas Competition Tribunal ruled that
    SAAs incentive scheme with travel agents was an
    abuse of its dominant position
  • Between 2001 and 2005 the airline made loyalty
    rebate payments (lump sums) to travel agents
    which were awarded at the end of the financial
    year if they attained defined targets for tickets
    sales
  • The Tribunal's decision opened the way for SAAs
    rivals Nationwide and Comair to pursue civil
    damages claims.

9
Mergers Acquisitions - EU
  • Microsoft Acquires the Yahoo Internet Search
    Business
  • The EU Commission (as the US DoJ) has cleared the
    proposed acquisition of the internet search and
    search advertising businesses of Yahoo! Inc. by
    Microsoft
  • According to the Commission, not only market
    participants do not expect the transaction to
    have any negative effects on competition or on
    their business but they also expect it to
    increase competition in internet search and
    search advertising by allowing Microsoft to
    become a stronger competitor to Google
  • In the EEA, Microsofts and Yahoos combined
    market shares in internet search and online
    search advertising are below 10, whereas Google
    enjoys market shares of above 90
  • Abbott Acquires Solvay Pharma
  • The EU Commission cleared the proposed
    acquisition of Solvay Pharma (Belgium) by Abbott
    Laboratories (USA), subject to conditions
  • The Commissions decision is conditional upon the
    divestment of the Cystic Fibrosis testing
    business of Solvay Pharmas subsidiary
    Innogenetics in the EEA
  • The Commission had concerns that the parties
    high combined market shares in the field of
    Cystic Fibrosis testing could have harmed
    competition in that market

10
Mergers Acquisitions Other Jurisdictions
  • Denmark Revokes Merger Approval for the First
    Time
  • Denmarks Competition Authority revoked a
    clearance for agricultural feed manufacturer
    Danish Agros takeover of rival Landbrugets Andel
    on the ground of insufficient information
    provided to the authority
  • After the deal was approved, the authority was
    notified of another transaction a joint
    takeover of Aarhusegnens Andel by Danish Agro and
    rival agricultural cooperative DLG
  • The Danish Agro/Landbrugets merger will now be
    subject to a new assessment
  • Carefully review the information provided to the
    competition authority!
  • Pre-merger Consultations in India
  • Indias Competition Authority plans to introduce
    a scheme for pre-merger consultations that would
    allow companies to approach the authority prior
    to filing a merger to get its views on the
    compliance of the proposed transaction with the
    Competition Act
  • Pre-merger consultations will reduce the time
    needed for the clearance to 40 days, as opposed
    to 210 days under the current regime

11
Private Litigation Developments
  • In re Micron Technology Inc. Securities
    Litigation
  • In re Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation
  • Dolan v. Fidelity Nat'l Title Ins. Co.
  • Fleischman v. Albany Medical Center
  • Fullerton Medical Group v. Sideman Bancroft
  • Other
  • Mercatus Group
  • ATT
  • U.S. Information Systems Inc.

12
In re Micron Technology Inc. Securities
Litigation (D.D.C.)
  • Court rules that securities class may not compel
    DOJ to produce information relating to Microns
    amnesty application
  • In October 2002, Micron entered into the DOJs
    amnesty program
  • Securities class alleged that Micron should have
    disclosed its illegal cartel conduct
  • Plaintiffs sought records of interviews of Micron
    employees in the DOJ investigation DOJ defended
    based on the federal law enforcement privilege
  • Judge Kessler agreed with DOJ that producing the
    documents would be an undue burden
  • The law enforcement privilege applies to the
    subpoenaed material and defeats any interest in
    finding reasonable conditions and restrictions
    for its production
  • Designed to prevent disclosure of information
    that would be contrary to the public interest in
    the effective functioning of law enforcement
  • It was readily apparent that a refusal to
    recognize the law enforcement privilege for
    information obtained through the DOJ Antitrust
    Divisions leniency program would chill future
    informants from coming forward

13
In re Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation
(N.D. Cal.)
  • SM recommended that plaintiffs stated a price
    fixing claim
  • Defendants argued that the plaintiffs alleged
    only a CRT, not a CRT products, cartel
  • SM CRTs only distinction is contrary to the
    repetitive allegations of the defendants'
    conduct regarding CRT Products and to their
    distribution, purchase, and sale in the United
    States.
  • SM found that the plaintiffs presented extensive
    allegations of meetings, communications, and
    agreements to fix prices and production levels
  • Defendants also argued regarding the
    insufficiency of allegations against each
    particular defendant
  • Each defendant's pleading' is not a rule
    requiring detailed recitation, but is to be
    evaluated under the principle of the adequacy of
    fair notice to the defendants.
  • Found that the moving defendants have more than
    adequate notice of what that defendant is charged
    with
  • SM rejected argument that the court lacked
    jurisdiction under FTAIA
  • The defendants again attempted to cast the
    alleged conspiracy as encompassing only CRTs,
    which were manufactured and sold only among
    foreign companies
  • There was jurisdiction because the CRT Products
    were imported to the U.S.
  • Judge is awaiting objections before ruling

14
Dolan v. Fidelity Nat'l Title Ins. Co. (2nd Cir.)
  • Plaintiffs alleged the defendants conspired to
    fix the price of NY title insurance
  • District court determined that the filed rate
    doctrine barred the complaint
  • Second Circuit stated that any filed rate'that
    is, one approved by the governing regulatory
    agencyis per se reasonable and unassailable in
    judicial proceedings brought by ratepayers
  • Plaintiffs argued
  • Filed rate doctrine does not apply because rates
    were improperly filed
  • Court should fill a regulatory vacuum created
    by an alleged lack of authority over title agents
  • NY Insurance Law banned the payments of
    commissions
  • Questioned whether the filed rate doctrine should
    ever be applied to NYs title insurance system
  • District court erred in dismissing claim for
    injunctive relief
  • 2nd Cir. disagreed with the plaintiffs arguments
    and affirmed the dismissal

15
Fleischman v. Albany Medical Center (N.D.N.Y.)
  • Nurses alleged that conspiring hospitals agreed
    to exchange, and regularly exchanged, detailed
    and nonpublic information about nurse wage rates
  • In a July 2008 decision, the court certified a
    class of registered nurses with respect to two
    issues whether there has been a violation of
    antitrust law and whether there has been injury
    to the class that the Sherman Act was designed to
    prevent. Fleischman v. Albany Medical Center,
    2008 WL 2945993, at 7 (N.D.N.Y. July 28, 2008).
    However, the court concluded that the
    predominance requirement was not satisfied as to
    the issues of injury-in-fact and damages
  • Court most recently denied plaintiffs motion to
    amend class certification on the issues of impact
    and damages as to a narrower class of registered
    nurses because the nurses have not shown that
    information uncovered during discovery
    constitutes the changed circumstances
    envisioned by Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(c)(1)(C) for proper
    amendment of class certification
  • In addition, plaintiffs have not met their burden
    to show that common issues regarding
    injury-in-fact and damages predominate over
    individual issues

16
Other Private Litigation
  • Mercatus Group LLC v. Lake Forest Hospital, N.D.
    Ill., No. 107-cv-2042
  • lobbying efforts of a hospital against the
    development of a stand-alone surgical center are
    protected by the Noerr-Pennington doctrine
  • ATT, 5th Circuit class action
  • Affirmed district courts ruling that class
    plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that their
    alleged geographic market a single apartment
    building was sufficient to allege that ATT and
    several subsidiaries violated antitrust law by
    entering agreements with apartment building
    owners to be their exclusive provider of
    telephone, video and Internet triple play
    services
  • U.S. Information Systems, Inc., 2nd Circuit
  • Affirmed lower court's grant of summary judgment
    to International Brotherhood of Electrical
    Workers Local No. 3 dismissal of U.S. Information
    Systems Inc.'s suit accusing a union and other
    electrical contractors of conspiring to muscle
    the company out of the market for
    telecommunications wiring and systems
    installation work
  • Fullerton Medical Group v. Sideman Bancroft
    (Cal. Ct. App.)
  • Fullerton alleged legal malpractice, breach of
    fiduciary duty, and constructive fraud, among
    other claims against Sideman Bancroft Court
    reversed grant of summary judgment on the legal
    malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty because
    experts declaration raised triable issues of
    material fact regarding the underlying antitrust
    claims

17
FTC/DOJ Non-Merger Activities Civil and Criminal
  • Significant Civil Cases / Investigations
  • Keyspan DOJ Challenge To Power Swap Contracts
  • Microsoft / Yahoo Investigation Closed
  • In re Androgel Antitrust Litigation
  • Business Review Letters
  • MyWire Global News Service
  • Criminal Antitrust Developments
  • Marine Hose Cartel plea
  • Ian Norris Extradition
  • New investigation Automotive component
    suppliers
  • DOJ Speech Reveals Criminal Enforcement Trends

18
U.S. v. KeySpan
  • U.S. v. KeySpan Corp. (S.D.N.Y., filed Feb. 22)
  • Complaint and stipulated final judgment Civil
    Case
  • Swap / hedging agreement alleged to restrain
    trade
  • KeySpan one of three major NY power suppliers
  • New capacity entry left KeySpan with two options,
    both worse than status quo a) withholding some
    capacity to sell less at higher price, or b)
    selling out capacity at lower price
  • Considered purchasing rival (Astoria), but
    realized would create market power issues
  • DOJ alleges KeySpan accomplished similar outcome
    by contracting through a thrid party intermediary
  • Swap with intermediary gave KeySpan a
    financial interest in substantially all of
    Astorias capacity
  • KeySpan would pay Astorias owner a fixed
    revenue stream in return for the revenues
    generated from Astorias capacity sales in power
    auctions
  • DOJ alleged swap effectively eliminated
    KeySpans incentive to compete for sales in the
    same way as a KeySpan purchase of Astoria would
    have done
  • 12 million disgorgement
  • Highly unusual remedy DOJ says it has not
    previously sought disgorgement as Sherman Act
    remedy
  • Noted here that private suit would face
    significant obstacles imposed by the filed rate
    doctrine, which bars damages claims when prices
    charged are based on a tariff / filed rate

19
Microsoft / Yahoo Investigation
  • DOJ closes investigation of Microsoft / Yahoo
    Internet search and paid advertising
    collaboration (Press release, Feb. 18)
  • Improved product Combining search provides
    larger set of queries to accelerate automated
    learning of Microsoft algorithms
  • Strong remaining competition from Google
  • DOJ says deal creates a more viable competitive
    alternative to Google

20
In re Androgel Antitrust Litigation
  • In re Androgel Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Ga.,
    Feb. 22)
  • Consolidated claims of FTC, direct purchasers and
    indirect purchasers
  • FTC loses another pay-for-delay / reverse
    payments case
  • Solvay had patent on Androgel
  • Patent litigation against Watson and Par, settled
    before any decisions on motions in the
    infringement cases
  • Solvay shares profits with Watson (15-30 million
    per year) and Par (6 million)
  • Watson and Par agree not to enter themselves
    until 2015
  • Claims based on reverse payments dismissed for
    failure to state a claim
  • Eleventh Circuit rule from Valley Drug and
    Schering cases precludes liability for settlement
    that does not exceed the scope of the patent
  • Settlement applied only to infringing products,
    and did not extend beyond the patent expiration
    date
  • Judge Thrash rejects FTC argument that scope of
    a patent includes the likelihood that a patent
    holder could assert its claims in court and win
  • Requiring analysis of who would win on the merits
    creates uncertainty that would discourage
    settlements of patent cases
  • Would require second guessing litigation
    outcomes, with treble damage exposure

21
DOJ Business Review Letters
  • MyWire Global News Service
  • DOJ has no current intention to challenge
  • Interconnection service among different
    publishers online content on the same topic
  • One publishers site can link to other publisher
    stories on the same topic
  • May cut out the need for searching by allowing
    direct jumps to related content
  • Non-exclusive agreements (so publishers can join
    other networks)
  • MyWire would sell subscriptions, but sets its own
    prices
  • Publishers establish their own pricing
  • Potential procompetitive impact allowing access
    to broad network of related content, which may be
    more efficient than searching

22
Criminal Antitrust Developments
  • Marine Hose
  • Parker ITR R.r.l. - Italian manufacturer
  • Fourth supplier to be charged in conspiracy
  • 2.29 million criminal fine
  • Cooperation agreement
  • Civil fine of gt15million to be paid by 14
    companies involved
  • Whistleblower to receive 15-20 of the 15
    million
  • Municipal bonds
  • Former employee of CDR Financial Products pled
    guilty (Feb. 23)
  • Israeli citizen
  • Trial scheduled for February 2011 for CDR and
    several executives

23
Criminal Antitrust Developments
  • New investigation automotive electronic
    component suppliers
  • DOJ / FBI Raids (Feb. 23)
  • Denso Corp.
  • Yazaki North America Inc.
  • Tokai Rika Co. Ltd.
  • Others
  • Other regulators raided companies oversees
    simultaneously

24
Criminal Antitrust Developments
  • Ian Norris Extradition
  • Long running saga US has been trying to
    extradite former CEO of Morgan Crucible since
    2003 after indicting him on conspiracy and
    obstruction of justice
  • UK blocked extradition on conspiracy charge
  • UK judge allowed extradition on obstruction of
    justice
  • In February - UK High Court refused to block
    extradition on obstruction of justice charges

25
DOJ Speech Reveals Criminal Enforcement Trends
 (S. Hammond, Feb. 25)
  • Leniency program is a "carrot" leading to more
    investigations
  • 1 program 1990
  • 50 programs 2010
  • About half of all investigations initiated or
    advanced through leniency program
  • More severe sanctions are a "stick" to deter
    behavior
  • Trend of corporate fines by decade
  • 1970s 48 million
  • 1980s 188 million
  • 1990s  1.6 billion
  • 2000s 4.2 billion
  • Increasing percentage of individual defendants
    sentenced to jail . . .  for longer average jail
    time
  • 2000 38 sentenced, 10 months average term
  • 2009 80 sentenced, 24 months average term
  • Continuing increase in international cooperation

26
FTC/DOJ Merger Enforcement Developments
  • Bemis/Alcan Packaging
  • PepsiCo/PBS/PAS
  • Polypore/Microporous

27
Bemis/Alcan Packaging (February 24, 2010)
  • DOJ approves Bemis acquisition of Alcan
    Packaging Food Americas business from Rio Tinto,
    with conditions
  • Bemis and Alcan are two leading US manufactures
    of flexible-packaging rollstock for chunk,
    sliced, and shredded natural cheese packaged for
    retail sale and flexible-packaging shrink bags
    for fresh meat
  • Complaint alleges unilateral effects due to
    dominant share in some markets
  • Complaint also alleges coordinated effects in
    fresh meat market, reducing the number of
    significant competitors from 3 to 2
  • Consent order requires the divestiture of Alcans
    business, including contracts, intellectual
    property and manufacturing plants

28
PepsiCo/PBS/PAS (February 26, 2010)
  • FTC approves PepsiCos acquisition of two of its
    bottlers, subject to behavioral relief
  • Bottlers have exclusive license to distribute
    DPSG (Dr. Pepper) brands
  • PepsiCo and DPSG are direct competitors in
    highly concentrated branded concentrate
    carbonated soft drinks market
  • Complaint alleges that PepsiCo would obtain
    access to competitively sensitive marketing and
    brand information from Dr. Pepper
  • Complaint alleges that PepsiCo could misuse the
    information, making Dr. Pepper a weaker
    competitor or would facilitate coordination
  • Consent requires that PepsiCo implement
    firewalls, preventing PepsiCo employees
    responsible for concentrate-related functions
    from access to DPSG information
  • Consent also provides for 5-year appointment for
    Monitor Trustee

29
Polypore/Microporous
  • FTC ALJ ruled that the 76 million consummated
    transaction was anticompetitive
  • FTC complaint alleged that the merger, completed
    in March 2008, illegally created a monopoly in
    North America for flooded battery separator
    markets
  • ALJs opinion has not been publically released
  • According to a statement from Polypore, the ALJ
    recommended that Polypore divest all of the
    acquired Microporous assets

30
Legislative Updates
  • Sen. Leahy filed written report on Feb. 2
    supporting the passage of a bill that
    prohibits/limits reverse payment and
    pay-for-delay settlements S. 369
  • Chairman Leibowitz issued statement supporting
    end of pay-for-delay settlements
  • Pres. Obama supports giving FTC enforcement to
    regulate pay-for-delay practice
  • McCarran-Ferguson repealer bill introduced in the
    House on Feb. 22, which passed it 406 to 19 on
    Feb. 24 H.R. 4626 now on Senate Calendar
  • Pres. Obama issued Statement of Administration
    Policy supporting passage of H.R. 4626
  • Joint DOJ/USDA workshops on competition in the
    agriculture industry begin in March

31
Presenter Bios
  • Philip Torbøl is a partner in the Brussels office
    of the international law firm of McDermott Will
    Emery/Stanbrook LLP.  He joined McDermott in 2005
    together with his colleagues from Stanbrook
    Hooper and is now a partner in the Firms EU
    regulatory practice and EU Competition Group. 
    His practice focuses on EU competition law, State
    aid and government strategies.  Philip began his
    career in the European Parliament in Brussels and
    was also an Executive Committee Member of the
    European Commissions Youth Forum.
  • Competition   Philips competition experience
    includes advising clients in matters related to
    the conduct of dominant companies, cartel
    investigations, merger control, and State aid. 
    In addition to defending clients before the
    European institutions, Philips practice focuses
    on helping companies define their distribution
    strategies within the framework of EU competition
    law not only preventively, but also to ensure
    that clients make the most of the competition law
    tools available.
  • Government Strategies   As a former EU official,
    Philip has substantial experience representing
    clients in strategic regulatory and legislative
    processes before the European institutions,
    including the Commission, Parliament and
    Council.  New EU regulations and their
    implementation process often present strategic
    opportunities to companies.  Philips objective
    is to actively take advantage of the EUs
    regulatory framework to ultimately put his
    clients in a favorable commercial position.
  • Philip is a regular contributor to the debate on
    EU and competition law policy.  He has written
    numerous articles and spoken on many occasions on
    competition issues to both general and
    specialized business audiences.  He was
    shortlisted for Global Competition Reviews 40
    under 40 list in 2008.
  • Philip is a member of the Lawyers Society of
    Denmark and the Brussels Bar (French).
  • Philip speaks Danish, English, French, Norwegian,
    and Swedish

Philip Torbøl Partner Brussels 32 2 230 50
59 ptorbol_at_mwe.com Education Copenhagen
University, Master of Law, 1999 Copenhagen
University, Bachelor of Law, 1994
32
Presenter Bios
  • Craig P. Seebald is a partner in the law firm of
    McDermott Will Emery LLP and is based in the
    Firm's Washington, D.C. office.  Craig focuses
    his practice on all aspects of antitrust law,
    including defending companies involved in
    government investigations, defending mergers and
    joint ventures before the antitrust agencies,
    providing antitrust counseling and representing
    clients in civil and criminal litigation. 
  • A key area of Craigs practice is defending
    companies involved in cartel and price fixing
    investigations.  He has successfully defended
    companies in grand jury investigations and
    coordinated the defense of multi-jurisdiction
    cartel investigations.  He has also represented
    clients in obtaining amnesty from the Department
    of Justice.  He has successfully defended
    companies in state and federal class actions in
    cartel cases.  
  • Another key area of Craigs practice is
    representing clients in antitrust matters
    involving intellectual property.  He has
    counseled clients on patent pools, standard
    setting, patent acquisition and licensing.  He
    has litigated several antitrust cases involving
    patent pools, licensing agreements, standard
    setting and the enforcement of invalid patents.
  • Craig has also successfully defended large-scale
    acquisitions, mergers, joint ventures and other
    collaborations before the Federal Trade
    Commission, Department of Justice and Department
    of Defense.  In addition, Craig also regularly
    counsels clients on distribution issues and is a
    member of the Firms Distribution Practice
    Group.   
  • Craig is ranked in Chambers USA Americas
    Leading Lawyers for Business, which reported that
    Craig impresses clients with his in-depth
    knowledge of our business and the issues we
    confront.

Craig Seebald Partner Washington, DC 202 756
8127 cseebald_at_mwe.com Education George
Washington University Law School, J.D. (cum
laude), 1992 Franklin Marshall College, B.A.,
1989
33
Presenter Bios
  • Jon B. Dubrow is a partner in the law firm of
    McDermott Will Emery LLP and is based in the
    Firm's Washington, D.C. office.  He focuses his
    practice on defending mergers, acquisitions and
    joint ventures before the Department of Justice,
    the Federal Trade Commission and foreign
    competition authorities, as well as antitrust and
    commercial litigation.  Jon also provides
    counseling on distribution issues and a wide
    variety of other competition-related matters.
    Jon is listed in Whos Who in American Law.
  • Transactions/Counseling Jon has provided
    antitrust counseling on several hundred
    transactions.  Jon has filed and/or managed the
    preparation of hundreds of HSR premerger
    notification forms and provided HSR counseling on
    many additional matters.  Jon has also managed
    multinational merger filings in numerous
    transactions.  He has appeared before the FTC/DOJ
    in dozens of substantive merger investigations,
    including numerous second requests.  Jon
    regularly represents the interests of
    third-parties who are threatened with harm by
    mergers or acquisitions involving their
    competitors or suppliers.  Jon regularly counsels
    clients on a broad range of antitrust issues
    including information exchanges, joint venture
    ancillary restraints and distribution issues.  He
    also has successfully defended clients in a
    criminal antitrust grand jury bid rigging
    investigation and a civil group boycott
    investigation.
  • Litigation Jon has handled a wide variety of
    antitrust claims in litigation.  These
    litigations have involved industries including
    hospitals, construction equipment, defense
    equipment, space launch vehicles, medical
    devices, biotech/pharmaceuticals and aircraft. 
    These cases have involved Sherman Act
    monopolization and conspiracy claims involving a
    variety of conduct including alleged price
    fixing, market allocation, tying, "bundled
    discounts," "aftermarket" parts and services, and
    a variety of other alleged anticompetitive
    conduct.  Jon has also defended governmental
    challenges to mergers or acquisitions under
    Section 7 of the Clayton Act.

Jon Dubrow Partner Washington, DC 202 756
8122 jdubrow_at_mwe.com Educations University of
Pennsylvania Law School, J.D. (cum laude, Order
of the Coif), 1992 University of Virginia, B.A.,
1988
34
Presenter Bios
  • Joel R. Grosberg is a partner in the law firm of
    McDermott Will Emery LLP and is based in the
    Firm's Washington, D.C. office.   He focuses his
    practice on defending mergers, acquisitions and
    joint ventures before the Federal Trade
    Commission, Department of Justice, state
    antitrust authorities, foreign competition
    authorities, as well as antitrust litigation. 
    Joel has significant experience in the high tech,
    chemical, health care and life sciences
    industries.  His experience includes counseling
    on matters related to pricing and distribution
    practices and other competition related matters.
  • Prior to joining McDermott Will Emery, Joel was
    an attorney with the Federal Trade Commission,
    where he handled a full range of antitrust
    matters involving the computer hardware and
    software, semiconductor, chemical, automotive
    parts, plastics, toy and paper industries.
  • Joel is admitted to practice in the state of New
    York and the District of Columbia.

Joel Grosberg Partner Washington, DC 202 756
8207 jgrosberg_at_mwe.com Education Cornell Law
School, J.D., 1996 University of Michigan, B.A.
(high distinction), 1992
35
Presenter Bios
  • Carrie G. Amezcua is an associate in the law firm
    of McDermott Will Emery LLP and is based in the
    Firms Washington, D.C. office. As a member of
    the Antitrust and Competition practice group, she
    focuses her practice on antitrust litigation.
  • During law school, Carrie was a teaching
    assistant for the Legal Rhetoric and Research
    program for two years and a note and comment
    editor for the American University Law Review.
    She also authored, Of Protection and Sovereignty
    Applying the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
    Extraterritorially to Protect Embedded Software
    Outsourced to China, American University Law
    Review, Volume 57.1, October 2007.
  • Before joining the legal profession, Carrie was a
    manager with a major consulting firm,
    specializing in business process and technology
    consulting in the Telecommunications industry.
  • Carrie is admitted to practice in the District of
    Columbia and the state of Pennsylvania.

Carrie Amezcua Associate Washington, DC 202 756
8309 camezcua_at_mwe.com Education American
University, Washington College of Law, J.D.
(magna cum laude, Order of the Coif), 2008 John
Carroll University, B.S.B.A., 1998
About PowerShow.com