[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ custom_padding_last_edited=”on|desktop” admin_label=”Inner Top Banner and Title Section” module_class=”inner-banner-sec” _builder_version=”4.27.0″ background_image=”https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/court-header-2.jpg” custom_padding=”120px||20px||false|false” custom_padding_tablet=”80px||20px||false|false” custom_padding_phone=”50px||||false|false” background_last_edited=”on|phone” locked=”off” collapsed=”off” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row module_class=”pstatic” _builder_version=”4.16″ custom_padding=”||||false|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ module_class=”pstatic” _builder_version=”4.16″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Title” module_class=”leftborder” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ text_font=”|900|||||||” text_text_color=”#ffffff” header_font=”|700||on|||||” header_text_align=”left” header_text_color=”#303030″ header_font_size=”40px” header_line_height=”1.3em” header_2_font=”|700|||||||” header_2_text_align=”left” header_2_text_color=”#ffffff” header_2_font_size=”27px” header_2_line_height=”1.25em” header_3_font=”|700|||||||” header_3_text_color=”#ffffff” header_3_font_size=”27px” header_3_line_height=”1.2em” max_width=”700px” module_alignment=”left” custom_padding=”||||false|false” custom_padding_tablet=”” custom_padding_phone=”||||false|false” custom_padding_last_edited=”on|phone” hover_enabled=”0″ text_font_size_tablet=”” text_font_size_phone=”20px” text_font_size_last_edited=”on|phone” header_text_align_tablet=”left” header_text_align_phone=”left” header_text_align_last_edited=”on|desktop” header_font_size_tablet=”36px” header_font_size_phone=”30px” header_font_size_last_edited=”on|desktop” header_line_height_tablet=”1.3em” header_line_height_phone=”1.3em” header_line_height_last_edited=”on|desktop” header_2_text_align_tablet=”left” header_2_text_align_phone=”left” header_2_text_align_last_edited=”on|phone” header_2_font_size_tablet=”32px” header_2_font_size_phone=”24px” header_2_font_size_last_edited=”on|phone” header_3_font_size_tablet=”27px” header_3_font_size_phone=”21px” header_3_font_size_last_edited=”on|phone” text_orientation_tablet=”” text_orientation_phone=”” text_orientation_last_edited=”on|phone” header_2_text_shadow_style=”preset1″ header_2_text_shadow_horizontal_length=”2px” header_2_text_shadow_vertical_length=”2px” header_2_text_shadow_blur_strength=”2px” header_2_text_shadow_color=”#303030″ global_colors_info=”{}” custom_css_main_element_last_edited=”on|desktop” sticky_enabled=”0″]<\/p>\n
[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ admin_label=”Main Content Section” module_class=”inner-content-sec” _builder_version=”4.27.0″ locked=”off” collapsed=”on” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.16″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.16″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Main Text” _builder_version=”4.27.0″ text_font=”||||||||” text_text_color=”#000000″ header_font=”|900|||||||” header_font_size=”48px” header_2_font=”|700||on|||||” header_2_text_align=”left” header_2_text_color=”#000000″ header_2_line_height=”1.2em” text_line_height_tablet=”” text_line_height_phone=”” text_line_height_last_edited=”on|desktop” header_font_size_tablet=”36px” header_font_size_phone=”27px” header_font_size_last_edited=”on|desktop” header_2_text_align_tablet=”left” header_2_text_align_phone=”” header_2_text_align_last_edited=”on|desktop” header_2_font_size_tablet=”” header_2_font_size_phone=”27px” header_2_font_size_last_edited=”on|desktop” global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n
We have substantial experience addressing each of the below-listed antitrust issues on behalf of plaintiffs, defendants, businesses, standard-setting organizations, amnesty applicants, and subjects and targets of criminal investigations. We have litigated most of these issues and advised our clients about all of them.<\/p>\n
Federal Antitrust Issues<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n California Antitrust Issues<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n Related Issues<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n <\/a>Federal Antitrust Issues<\/strong><\/p>\n Liability under Section 1 of the Sherman Act<\/u>:\u00a0Horizontal price-fixing, horizontal market allocation, bid-rigging, horizontal group boycotts, coordinated refusals-to-deal, tying arrangements, exclusive dealing, resale price maintenance, standard-setting matters, \u201cquick-look\u201d offenses, offenses under the rule of reason, dealer restraints, reverse settlement payments in patent litigation, misuse of MFN clauses, and miscellaneous restraints of trade.<\/p>\n Liability under Section 2 of the Sherman Act<\/u>: Monopolization, attempted monopolization, and conspiracy to monopolize, as well as various kinds of \u201canti-competitive conduct\u201d alleged against supposed monopolists, such as misuse of essential facilities, unilateral refusals-to-deal, FRAND abuse,\u00a0bundled discounts, product bundling, misuse of intellectual property rights, predatory pricing, monopoly leveraging, and other kinds of \u201cpredatory conduct.\u201d<\/p>\n Liability under Section 3 of the Clayton Act<\/span>: Probable market foreclosure accomplished by tying arrangements or exclusive dealing.<\/p>\n Liability under the Robinson-Patman Act<\/span>:\u00a0Unlawful price discrimination, as well as loyalty discounts, rebates, concealed price discrimination, and other pricing preferences.<\/p>\n Market Definition, Market Power in Section 1 Cases, and Monopoly Power in Section 2 Cases<\/span><\/p>\n Antitrust Standing and Antitrust Injury<\/span><\/p>\n Incipient Threats to Competition under Section 7 of the Clayton Act<\/span>:\u00a0Challenging or defending mergers and acquisitions that allegedly pose anticompetitive risks; related matters.<\/p>\n Resale Price Maintenance (Vertical Price-Fixing)<\/span>: The confused state of the law in the aftermath of the\u00a0Leegin<\/em> case; enforcing\u00a0Colgate<\/em> policies and minimum advertised pricing (MAP pricing).<\/p>\n Dealer Restraints<\/span><\/p>\n Private Standard-Setting Matters<\/span><\/p>\n Misuse of Most-Favored Nation Clauses (MFN clauses)<\/span><\/p>\n Antitrust Immunity under State and Federal Law<\/span><\/p>\n Sham Litigation and the Noerr-Pennington<\/em> Doctrine<\/span><\/p>\n The International Reach of American Antitrust Law<\/span><\/p>\n Antitrust Reporting Requirements under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act<\/span><\/p>\n <\/a>California Antitrust Issues<\/strong><\/p>\n Restraints of Trade under California\u2019s Cartwright Act<\/span>: Forbids the same conduct as Section 1, but for some offenses a more expansive standard is applied; resale price maintenance apparently remains a per se<\/em> violation.<\/p>\n Predatory Pricing and Price Discrimination under California\u2019s Unfair Practices Act<\/span>: Imposes a more expansive standard against predatory pricing (a particular kind of anticompetitive practice employed by monopolists and firms that practice primary-line price discrimination); specifically, California law allows firms to prevail on predatory pricing claims that cannot proceed under the restrictive federal standard adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court in the modern era; in particular, there is no obligation under California law to prove \u201crecoupment\u201d (i.e., no obligation to prove that the predatory seller, after acquiring its monopoly by charging low prices, can successfully raise its prices to supracompetitive rates after running its rivals out of the market).<\/p>\n Violations of California\u2019s Unfair Competition Law<\/span>: Authorizes injunctive relief for antitrust abuses under California\u2019s more expansive, plaintiff-friendly standards, allowing firms to obtain protection that they possibly cannot obtain under federal law; also authorizes restitution of ill-gotten gains and can serve as a basis for class-action litigation.<\/p>\n <\/a>Related Issues<\/strong><\/p>\n Patent misuse<\/a>, patent fraud, collusive settlements of patent litigation, sham enforcement of intellectual property rights, false advertising<\/a>, trademark offenses<\/a>, and related matters.<\/p>\n Mr. Markham also has general knowledge of competition policy in the European Union and Canada and clerked for a leading law firm in Montr\u00e9al, Qu\u00e9bec while at law school (Ogilvy, Renault<\/a>), working as a summer clerk in its competition group. We can readily collaborate with leading firms in foreign jurisdictions in order to help our clients to address international and global antitrust concerns<\/a>.<\/p>\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Our Antitrust Experience and ExpertiseWe have substantial experience addressing each of the below-listed antitrust issues on behalf of plaintiffs, defendants, businesses, standard-setting organizations, amnesty applicants, and subjects and targets of criminal investigations. We have litigated most of these issues and advised our clients about all of them. Federal Antitrust Issues California Antitrust Issues Related Issues […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":26545,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"on","_et_pb_old_content":"