Elai Katz

August 26, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Elai Katz, a partner at Cahill Gordon & Reindel, writes that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that a district court erred when it denied a request by the Federal Trade Commission to block the combination of two natural and organic supermarket chains. Other recent antitrust developments of note included the European Court of First Instance's ruling that a consulting firm was liable for its supporting role in a cartel among chemical producers.

By Elai Katz

9 minute read

August 31, 2011 | New York Law Journal

In his Antitrust column, Cahill Gordon & Reindel partner Elai Katz reviews recent decisions on an agreement to share revenues among Southern California supermarket chains during a strike, an FTC challenge to a drug acquisition for failure to properly define the relevant product market, an enforcement action charging an ATM manufacturer with fabrication of documents submitted to the government for premerger review, and more.

By Elai Katz

10 minute read

September 22, 2005 | New York Law Journal

William T. Lifland, senior counsel at Cahill Gordon & Reindel and Elai Katz, a partner at the firm, review recent antitrust matters of interest including several states requiring divestitures of about two dozen stores to satisfy their concerns about the merger of the two largest department store chains in the nation, even though the FTC closed its investigation without enforcement action, and a challenge to a policy enabling traditional realtors to block Web-based rivals' access to listings.

By William T. Lifland and Elai Katz

10 minute read

August 22, 2007 | New York Law Journal

William T. Lifland, senior counsel of the firm of Cahill Gordon & Reindel, and Elai Katz, a partner at the firm, write that, reversing a district court's judgment, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that a food wholesaler had proffered enough evidence of rivalry with a food facility manager to proceed with a Robinson-Patman Act claim.

By William T. Lifland and Elai Katz

7 minute read

October 22, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Elai Katz, a partner at Cahill Gordon & Reindel, reports that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently ruled that an agreement settling a patent dispute did not violate antitrust law because it did not restrain competition beyond the scope of the patent. Also, the FTC challenged an agreement to divide markets along the U.S.-Canada border that was extended beyond the term of a legitimate collaboration between golf store chains.

By Elai Katz

9 minute read

August 24, 2006 | New York Law Journal

William T. Lifland, senior counsel of Cahill Gordon & Reindel, and Elai Katz, a partner at the firm, write that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently affirmed dismissal of monopoly leveraging claims brought against an HIV drug maker. They also analyze other recent decisions.

By William T. Lifland and Elai Katz

7 minute read

December 29, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Elai Katz, a partner at Cahill Gordon & Reindel, writes that two district courts rejected separate claims brought by private plaintiffs alleging that two transactions - a beer merger and a credit-card network public offering - would likely lessen competition in violation of �7 of the Clayton Act.

By Elai Katz

9 minute read

February 04, 2011 | New York Law Journal

In his Antitrust column, Cahill Gordon & Reindel partner Elai Katz reviews recent developments, including the FTC's ruling that the completed combination of two battery separator manufacturers violated antitrust law, a district court's decision that a complaint alleging unlawful tying involving the popular Webkinz stuffed animals sufficiently defined a relevant market to survive a motion to dismiss, and more.

By Elai Katz

11 minute read

December 28, 2006 | New York Law Journal

William T. Lifland, senior counsel at Cahill Gordon & Reindel, and Elai Katz, a partner at the firm, write that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit indicated that a software license obliging the licensee to grant free licenses for improvements did not unreasonably restrain trade. Also, the Supreme Court of Texas upset a jury verdict because there was no evidence that favorable soft drink marketing agreements with a leading supplier had an adverse effect on competition.

By William T. Lifland and Elai Katz

7 minute read

July 15, 2010 | New York Law Journal

In his Antitrust column, Elai Katz, a partner of the firm of Cahill Gordon & Reindel, discusses recent developments, including the Supreme Court's ruling on the NFL's licensing activities, the FTC's closing of an investigation into Google's acquisition of a leading rival mobile advertising network, and a Third Circuit decision dismissing dental laboratories' claims that a leading artificial tooth supplier, which had been previously found liable for monopolization, conspired with its dealers in violation of antitrust laws.

By Elai Katz

11 minute read