State of the States: Antitrust Enforcement Gets More Aggressive
In this edition of their Antitrust Trade and Practice column, Karen Hoffman Lent and Kenneth Schwartz review some of the biggest recent case developments from state attorneys general, as well as legislative updates on laws that may introduce new standards in evaluating antitrust cases.
September 12, 2022 at 11:00 AM
11 minute read
Much of the antitrust community's attention over the last year has focused on the ongoing shifts at the federal agencies—by way of example, so far this year, our articles have covered the aggressive review of, and in some cases, departure from, the horizontal and vertical Merger Guidelines by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DOJ); the DOJ's criminal prosecution of no-poach agreements; and federal agencies' withdrawal of Trump-era patent policy, among others. But state antitrust enforcers have been active as well—and, like the federal agencies, they have had mixed results. State attorneys general play a unique role in U.S. antitrust enforcement. They can bring suits under their state's antitrust laws, which mostly—though not entirely—track the federal antitrust laws. State attorneys general can also bring suit under federal antitrust laws with parens patrie standing, a special type of standing that allows governments to bring suit on behalf of their residents. We review some of the biggest recent case developments from state attorneys general, as well as legislative updates on laws that may introduce new standards in evaluating antitrust cases.
Case Updates
No Disgorgement for Generic Drug Price Fixing. State attorneys general suffered a setback earlier this summer in one of the largest antitrust cases in the country, In re Generic Pharmaceuticals Pricing Antitrust Litigation, 16-MD-2724 (E.D. Pa. June 7, 2022). The case, brought in federal court in 2016 by attorneys general from 47 states, plus D.C. and Puerto Rico, has tracked a DOJ investigation into price-fixing, bid-rigging, and customer-allocation schemes in the generic drug industry, which has so far led to charges against seven generic drug manufacturers and a settlement of nearly $450 million. The states' antitrust case is even larger, alleging a massive conspiracy among twenty generic drug manufacturers to fix prices for several years. The state attorneys general sought disgorgement of the manufacturers' allegedly ill-gotten gains, as well as injunctive relief.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Serious Legal Errors'?: Rival League May Appeal Following Dismissal of Soccer Antitrust Case
6 minute readHow Some Elite Law Firms Are Growing Equity Partner Ranks Faster Than Others
4 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Thursday Newspaper
- 2Public Notices/Calendars
- 3Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-117
- 4Rejuvenation of a Sharp Employer Non-Compete Tool: Delaware Supreme Court Reinvigorates the Employee Choice Doctrine
- 5Mastering Litigation in New York’s Commercial Division Part V, Leave It to the Experts: Expert Discovery in the New York Commercial Division
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250