Search for: "Sherman v. United States"
Results 781 - 800
of 1,054
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Sep 2014, 11:22 pm
Independence Tube Corporation, for example, the United States Supreme Court held that the coordinated activities of a parent and its wholly-owned subsidiary are a single enterprise (incapable of conspiring) for purposes of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. [read post]
7 Dec 2020, 8:43 am
For example in United States v. [read post]
3 Sep 2009, 10:46 am
McDonough et al. v. [read post]
18 Apr 2022, 1:14 am
In the Ninth Circuit appeal of the Epic Games v. [read post]
12 Feb 2012, 3:30 pm
For example, the Commissioner cites United States v. [read post]
17 May 2024, 9:16 am
See United States v. [read post]
8 Oct 2021, 12:02 pm
– United States v. [read post]
7 Oct 2020, 3:23 pm
(relisted after the Sept. 29 conference) United States v. [read post]
16 Jun 2022, 9:33 pm
Do the federal antitrust laws in the United States provide you any remedies? [read post]
8 Feb 2018, 7:33 am
The au pairs filed suit claiming that the agencies violated the Sherman Antitrust Act, RICO, the FLSA, and the laws of several states. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 5:19 pm
Obama, President of the United States, et al. [read post]
10 May 2016, 2:55 pm
That lawsuit, Spencer Meyer v. [read post]
10 May 2016, 2:55 pm
That lawsuit, Spencer Meyer v. [read post]
10 May 2016, 2:55 pm
That lawsuit, Spencer Meyer v. [read post]
30 Apr 2017, 2:58 pm
Co., Ltd. v. [read post]
29 Aug 2012, 10:09 pm
(“Teva”) violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by delaying EFFEXOR XR generic competition. [read post]
23 Sep 2016, 7:21 am
” Here, “by committing an ever-increasing amount of State funds to paying State employee salaries or overtime,” the federal executive “can unilaterally deplete State resources, forcing the States to adopt or acquiesce to federal policies, instead of implementing State policies and priorities. [read post]
Can Deals That Do Not Trigger an HSR Filing Raise Antitrust Concerns? Yes, Buyer and Sellers Beware!
8 Nov 2019, 1:25 pm
Twin America, LLC, et. al, Twin America, Coach, and City Sights together were required to pay $7.5 million in disgorgement to remedy alleged violations of Section 7 of the Clayton Act, Section 1 of the Sherman Act, as well as New York State law, including the Donnelly Act (see Proposed Final Judgment, United States v. [read post]
5 Apr 2007, 6:02 pm
However, the Commission concluded that, while JEDEC minutes indicated a “reluctance” to adopt patented technologies, those minutes did not “state that the committee will not standardize a patented technology, and the basic JEDEC and EIA documents repeatedly spell out procedures under which patented technologies may be accepted. [read post]
12 Nov 2012, 4:00 am
”United States v. [read post]
