Expert Analysis

• Recalling USWNT's Legal PR Playbook Amid World Cup Bid

  

  As the U.S. Women's National Soccer Team strives to take home another World Cup trophy, their 2022 pay equity settlement with the U.S. Soccer Federation serves as a good reminder that winning in the court of public opinion can be more powerful than a victory inside the courtroom, says Hector Valle at Vianovo.

• Colorado Antitrust Reform Carries Broad State Impact

  

  Colorado recently became the latest state to update and expand its antitrust laws, and the new act may significantly affect enforcement and private litigation, particularly when it comes to workers and consumers, says Diane Hazel at Foley & Lardner.

• Mootness Fees Are Losing Traction In Del. And Federal Courts

  

  The Delaware Chancery's recent decision in Anderson v. Magellan Health deals a significant blow to plaintiffs attorneys seeking mootness fees for merger litigation brought in that state, and federal courts are trending in the same direction, say Paul Marino and Michael Fialkoff at Day Pitney.

• Opinion

  Merger Guidelines Should Provide For Competition Trustees

  

  Following the U.S. antitrust agencies' release of draft merger guidelines, retired U.S. Court of Federal Claims Chief Judge Susan Braden suggests a court-appointed competition trustee would help ensure U.S. competition without impairing economic prosperity.

• Senate Hearing Highlights Antitrust Hazards In PGA-LIV Deal

  

  The U.S. Senate's recent questioning of PGA Tour COO Ron Price on the proposed deal with LIV Golf and its release of a dossier of framework agreements covered a variety of issues that could exacerbate antitrust concerns, including the predatory purchasing theory of competitive harm, free-riding and alternate funding, say attorneys at Perkins Coie.

• Investors With ESG Aims Should Heed Antitrust Reporting Rules

  

  As investors globally are embracing environmental, social and governance investing, regulatory agencies have made clear that ESG initiatives are not immune from antitrust scrutiny, and investors cannot count on receiving special exemptions from the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act reporting requirements, say Jonathan Gleklen and Francesca Pisano at Arnold & Porter.

• US Antitrust Approach Toward ESG Clashes With EU Stance

  

  A comparison between how EU and U.S. antitrust enforcers have approached companies' cooperative environmental, social and corporate governance efforts highlights America's comparatively harsh stance, contributing to a difficult compliance climate for international businesses, say attorneys at Steptoe & Johnson.

• When Investment Banks Can Sell Real Estate In Calif.

  

  When investment banks sell businesses that own property in California, they may run into trouble if they are not licensed real estate brokers, unless the property is merely incidental to the deal at hand, say attorneys at Holland & Knight.

• Merger Guidelines' Broad Tack Ignores Recent Precedent

  

  The U.S. Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission's new proposed merger guidelines are consistent with the Biden administration's expansive approach to antitrust enforcement, but they fail to grapple meaningfully with much of modern economic precedent and court decisions requiring greater agency rigor in merger analysis, say attorneys at Freshfields.

• Ch. 11 Ruling Informs On Social Media Ownership Rights

  

  Social media users now have useful guidance regarding account ownership rights following a federal bankruptcy court's recent ruling in the Vital Pharmaceuticals Chapter 11 case, which rejected the notion that advertised content alone could create a presumption of ownership for the advertised business, say Deborah Enea and Thomas Dockery at Troutman Pepper.

• Parsing FTC's Intercontinental-Black Knight Merger Challenge

  

  The Federal Trade Commission's recent Article III case challenging a merger between Intercontinental Exchange and Black Knight suggests the agency is using a structuralist approach to evaluate the merger's potential anti-competitive harm, says David Evans at Kelley Drye.

• Perspectives

  Mallory Gives Plaintiffs A Better Shot At Justice

  

  Critics of the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern claim it opens the door to litigation tourism, but the ruling simply gives plaintiffs more options — enabling them to seek justice against major corporations in the best possible court, say Rayna Kessler and Ethan Seidenberg at Robins Kaplan.

• FERC Order Affirms Increased Scrutiny Of Investor-Utility Ties

  

  A recent Federal Energy Regulatory Commission order confirming more aggressive scrutiny of investors' exercise of control over public utilities through representation on their boards or the boards of companies holding interests in them means that both investors and utilities face significantly heightened compliance obligations, say attorneys at Akin.

• Effectual Relief Questions Linger After Section 363 Ruling

  

  In the months since the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in MOAC Mall Holdings, courts and practitioners must grapple with the issue of what effectual relief courts may grant upon an appeal of an unstayed sale order, says Monique Jewett-Brewster at Hopkins Carley.

• CFIUS Clampdown Will Deter Allied-Country Investment

  

  The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States’ recent redefinition of transaction "completion date" is the latest in a series of steps taken in the name of U.S. security that are likely to deter investments from friendly countries and increase capital costs for U.S. startups, says Stephen Heifetz at Wilson Sonsini.