Anthony S. Ferrara
Subscribe to Anthony S. Ferrara's PostsAnthony S. Ferrara focuses his practice on regulatory and antitrust matters. He advises clients on mergers and acquisitions, including obtaining clearance from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DOJ). He also counsels clients in relation to complex antitrust litigation and government investigations. Anthony has assisted clients across a variety of industries, including the aerospace and defense, pharmaceutical, consumer products, and energy sectors. In addition to his antitrust work, he maintains an active pro bono practice. Read Anthony S. Ferrara's full bio.
2019 in Review: Overview of Cartel Investigations
By Anthony S. Ferrara, Louise Aberg and Paul M. Thompson on Mar 18, 2020
Posted In Cartel Enforcement, DOJ Developments, EC Developments, EU Developments, Private Litigation
The Department of Justice Antitrust Division (DOJ) was active in 2019. At the beginning of 2019, the DOJ was preparing for trial in six matters and had 91 pending grand jury investigations. Throughout 2019, the DOJ made public several new investigations, including in the commercial flooring industry, online auctions for surplus government equipment, the insulation...
Continue Reading
Aerospace and Defense Series: DOJ and FTC Vertical Merger Guidelines Will Impact Government Contractors
By Anthony S. Ferrara and Jon B. Dubrow on Feb 24, 2020
Posted In DOJ Developments, FTC Developments, Joint Ventures/Competitor Collaboration, Mergers & Acquisitions
Last month, the Department of Justice Antitrust Division (DOJ) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released updated Vertical Merger Guidelines in draft form. These guidelines provide a useful resource for aerospace and defense contractors involved in M&A transactions. Vertical competition issues frequently arise in this industry given the nature of the supply base and contracting and...
Continue Reading
FTC Considers Taking on Non-Competes in the Workplace Through Rulemaking
By Anthony S. Ferrara and Michelle Lowery on Jan 29, 2020
Posted In FTC Developments
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is considering a rulemaking to address the use of non-compete provisions in employment contracts. On January 9, 2020, the FTC held a day-long workshop to start a public conversation on whether it should use its rulemaking power to take on this issue. The two Democratic Commissioners have expressed strong support...
Continue Reading
FTC Challenges Axon’s Consummated Acquisition of Body-Worn Camera Competitor
By Anthony S. Ferrara, Jon B. Dubrow and Joel R. Grosberg on Jan 17, 2020
Posted In FTC Developments, Mergers & Acquisitions
The US antitrust regulators continue to challenge consummated transactions. On January 3, 2020, the FTC filed an administrative complaint against Axon Enterprise, Inc., challenging its consummated acquisition of VieVu, a body-worn camera competitor, from Safariland. The FTC also challenged non-compete agreements that Axon and Safariland signed in connection with the acquisition. The complaint demonstrates the...
Continue Reading
DOJ and Merging Parties Agree on Unprecedented Arbitration Procedure to Resolve Merger Challenge
By Anthony S. Ferrara, Gregory E. Heltzer and Noah Feldman Greene on Oct 11, 2019
Posted In DOJ Developments, Mergers & Acquisitions
WHAT HAPPENED: On September 4, 2019, the US Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division (DOJ) sued to block Novelis Inc.’s proposed $2.6 billion acquisition of Aleris Corporation. DOJ alleged that the transaction would combine two of only four North American producers of aluminum auto body sheet (ABS). DOJ further alleged that Aleris was a new and...
Continue Reading
Texas Court Declares Licensing Offer Based on End Device Is FRAND, Diverges from California Court in Qualcomm
By Anthony S. Ferrara, Lisa A. Peterson and McDermott Will & Emery on Jun 3, 2019
Posted In IP Antitrust, Private Litigation
Standard-essential patent holders and implementers may face uncertainty regarding licensing practices following a May 23 Texas court ruling. In the ruling, a Texas federal judge reached a conclusion different from a recent California court decision—FTC v. Qualcomm—on the question of whether an SEP holder must base its royalty rates on the “smallest salable patent-practicing unit”...
Continue Reading
Federal Judge Finds Qualcomm Violated the FTC Act Through Monopolistic and Exclusionary Conduct
By Lisa A. Peterson, Anthony S. Ferrara and McDermott Will & Emery on May 23, 2019
Posted In FTC Developments, IP Antitrust, Monopolization/Abuse of Dominance
On May 21, a California federal judge ruled in favor of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in its suit against Qualcomm in a much-anticipated decision, concluding that Qualcomm violated the FTC Act by maintaining its monopoly position as a modem chip supplier through a number of exclusionary practices, including refusing to license standard essential patents...
Continue Reading
Antitrust M&A Snapshot | US Tackles Vertical Merger Enforcement Guidelines while the EC Blocks 2 Transactions
By McDermott Will & Emery, Anthony S. Ferrara, David Henry, Jon B. Dubrow and Joel R. Grosberg on May 15, 2019
Posted In DOJ Developments, EC Developments, EU Developments, FTC Developments, Mergers & Acquisitions
The first quarter of 2019 proved to be as active as ever for antitrust regulators in both the United States and Europe. In the United States, vertical merger enforcement was the focus of a few high-profile matters. The US DOJ has been working on an update to the Non-Horizontal Merger Guidelines, possibly providing clarification for...
Continue Reading
Federal Jury Finds that Ericsson’s Licensing Offer to HTC is FRAND
By Anthony S. Ferrara, Lisa A. Peterson and McDermott Will & Emery on Feb 25, 2019
Posted In IP Antitrust
On February 15, a Texas federal jury found that Ericsson did not breach its obligation to offer HTC licenses to its standard-essential patents (SEPs) on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. The verdict ended a nearly two-year dispute as to whether FRAND obligations preclude a licensing offer based on end products rather than components. Ericsson...
Continue Reading
District Court: IPR Policy Does Not Automatically Require License Fees Based on Components
By Lisa A. Peterson, Anthony S. Ferrara and McDermott Will & Emery on Feb 12, 2019
Posted In IP Antitrust
The US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas ruled that for the purposes of honoring a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) commitment, a pool member is not required to base royalties for its standard essential patents (SEPs) on the value of components. HTC America Inc. et al. v. Ericsson Inc., Case No. 6:18-cv-00243-JRG...
Continue Reading
