Search for: "S. Sherman"
Results 561 - 580
of 6,009
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jul 2022, 10:39 pm
All that the revised panel opinion said that was that "Continental failed to state claims under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act"--as opposed to saying there's no Article III standing (which is not specific to antitrust but broader) like in the first version. [read post]
1 Jul 2022, 10:52 pm
Conti has not convinced, and never will convince, a U.S. judge that it has standing and actionable claims under the Sherman Act. [read post]
29 Jun 2022, 9:44 pm
Also, the panel opinion 2.0 is limited to only the Sherman Act Section 1 and 2 claims, i.e., couldn't be more narrowly case-specific at this stage.Whatever Conti may say in its petition can't reasonably meet the second criterion either. [read post]
29 Jun 2022, 10:44 am
Ramirez,141 S. [read post]
29 Jun 2022, 3:00 am
.; 5/22), the 11th Cir. held that a private equity firm can’t conspire with its portfolio company within the meaning of the Sherman Act. [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 9:13 pm
It merely affirms the district court--unanimously--with respect to the dismissal of Conti's Sherman Act Section 1 and 2 claims. [read post]
27 Jun 2022, 2:38 pm
Notably, the Envistacom indictment does not include a Sherman Act antitrust count. [read post]
26 Jun 2022, 12:28 am
By the end of the 40’s, most of the splendor had vanished from the North Shore. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 6:30 am
It’s not simply how one tells the dancer from the dance; it’s also how one evaluates performances of Mozart or Beethoven on “original instruments,” as Malcolm Bilson performed, or on the most advanced Steinways, as was the case with Russell Sherman. [read post]
22 Jun 2022, 10:10 am
ROSS had made other antitrust claims against Westlaw, saying it violated the Sherman Antitrust Act by refusing to license its database and engaging in sham litigation to block competitors from its industry. [read post]
22 Jun 2022, 9:01 am
Here are a few other articles the RatSec crew mentioned in the course of the episode: Gabe Rottman's Lawfare piece, "The Assange Indictment Seeks to Punish Pure Publication" Justin Sherman's Lawfare piece unpacking how TikTok intersects with U.S. national security The YouTube series "Two Minute Papers," which features advances in AI Ezra Klein's discussion of AI ethics with Ted Chiang [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 10:20 am
However, Judge Ho didn't "dissent-dissent" but contented himself with a footnote voicing his different preference.The new consensus--and now it's a truly unanimous panel decision--is that Conti fails at the third hurdle: it failed to state Section 1 or Section 2 Sherman Act claims. [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 7:45 am
Less than four months before SaurikIT filed its original complaint, Epic Games filed an antitrust lawsuit against Apple that also alleged Apple’s iOS app distribution and in-app payment restraints violate the Sherman Act and the UCL. [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 4:00 am
Here’s the Tuesday morning read: With two weeks left in June, 18 cases to go (Amy Howe, Howe on the Court) The Supreme Court, Public Opinion and the Fate of Roe (Adam Liptak, The New York Times) What a Roberts compromise on abortion could look like (Josh Gerstein, Politico) Justices seem poised to hear elections case pressed by GOP (Mark Sherman & Gary D. [read post]
19 Jun 2022, 7:36 am
Lee to Union General Ulysses S. [read post]
17 Jun 2022, 11:55 am
Justice Department’s (DOJ) Antitrust Division has indicated in recent months that criminal prosecutions may be forthcoming under Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, but refuses to provide any guidance regarding enforcement criteria. [read post]
16 Jun 2022, 9:33 pm
Section 1 of the Sherman Act – Agreements Federal antitrust laws also analyze agreements by two or more parties that restrain trade in the market. [read post]
14 Jun 2022, 11:20 pm
The complainant(s) may know what's in the ruling, but wouldn't be allowed to talk about it. [read post]
14 Jun 2022, 9:42 am
Sherman also served his country in Vietnam. [read post]
14 Jun 2022, 6:32 am
But Judges Stewart and Engelhardt would still hold that Conti lacked basic standing (Article III standing), with no need to reach the question of antitrust standing, much less of antitrust pleading standards (Conti's Sherman Act Sec. 1 & 2 claims). [read post]
