Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section

California privacy lawyers have had a busy July digesting several significant developments in privacy law, at home and abroad. Enforcement actions under the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and the July 16 decision in Europe’s highest court to invalidate the Privacy Shield data transfer framework underscore that compliance cannot not stop with the posting of a policy or the inclusion of standard terms in a contract. Read more

The Antitrust, UCL and Privacy Section presents the 30th Annual Golden State Institute! Read more

Calling all young lawyers! Come join us for fun and discussion with some of California’s best antitrust and privacy lawyers. You will get to network and discuss various topics in an informal “break-out room” setting. Read more

Calling all young lawyers! Come join us for fun and discussion with some of California’s best antitrust and privacy lawyers. Read more

Calling all law students! Come join us for fun and discussion with some of California’s best antitrust and privacy lawyers. Read more

In a Pretrial Order No. 105 (“PTO”) district court Judge Cynthia M. Rufe, ordered that the defendant companies produce responsive documents from agreed upon custodian with agreed upon search terms without regard for the relevance or responsiveness of the document. Read more

Back in the last days before stay-at-home orders—when news of the novel coronavirus had not been so consuming—the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued its decision in Marion Healthcare, LLC v. Becton Dickinson & Co., 952 F.3d 832 (7th Cir. 2020). Read more

In June 2018 the Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) lost their challenge to the AT&T/Time Warner. The AT&T/Time Warner case was the first vertical merger case litigated by the Antitrust Division or Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in almost 40 years. This was a vertical merger as Time Warner was a leading holder of video content and AT&T was a significant distributor of the same. Read more

In a May 1, 2020 order, Chief Magistrate Judge Joseph Spero denied Uber’s motion to dismiss a monopolization complaint filed by Sidecar, a defunct ride-hailing company that claims it was driven out of business by Uber’s alleged anticompetitive practices in the ride-hailing market. The case is SC Innovations, Inc. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 18-cv-07440-JCS, 2020 WL 2097611 (N.D. Cal., May 1, 2020). Read more

In response to the ongoing pandemic, federal, state and local government enforcers, as well as private litigants, have been actively pursuing alleged price gougers.  Our panel will discuss California and federal price gouging statutes, recent enforcement and litigation developments, key concerns for manufacturers, distributors and retailers in this area, and the economic issues at play in price gouging disputes. Read more