Lisa A. Peterson Lisa A. Peterson

Subscribe to Lisa A. Peterson's Posts
Lisa A. Peterson focuses her practice on antitrust, regulatory and litigation matters. She assists clients across a variety of industries and has represented numerous clients in the health care, pharmaceutical, and biotechnology industries. Lisa advises clients on mergers and acquisitions, including obtaining clearance from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DOJ), as well as counsels clients on issues regarding antitrust compliance, pricing, and distribution. She also counsels clients on cartel prosecutions and defenses, including government investigations and the initiation and defense of civil class action litigation. Read Lisa Peterson's full bio.

Antitrust Enforcement Update: Spotlight on Physician Transactions


By , , , and on Jun 21, 2019
Posted In FTC Developments, Healthcare Antitrust

At both the state and federal level, antitrust enforcement agencies continue to pursue successful challenges to physician practice transactions. This article summarizes two recent enforcement actions, as well as a new state law that requires prior notice of healthcare provider transactions. We also offer practical takeaways for providers pursuing practice acquisitions. Access the full article.

Continue Reading



Texas Court Declares Licensing Offer Based on End Device Is FRAND, Diverges from California Court in Qualcomm


By , and 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 , and 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



Out of Bounds: Sports Agencies Flagged for Anticompetitive Bidding Agreements


By and on Feb 27, 2019
Posted In Cartel Enforcement, DOJ Developments, Joint Ventures/Competitor Collaboration, Mergers & Acquisitions

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) recently sued former joint venture partners because they allegedly coordinated their competitive activities beyond the legitimate scope of their venture. This case illustrates several important points. First, companies who collaborate through joint ventures and similar arrangements need to be mindful that any legitimate collaborative activity does not “spill over”...

Continue Reading



Federal Jury Finds that Ericsson’s Licensing Offer to HTC is FRAND


By , and 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 , and 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



FTC Secures Partial Victory Requiring SEP Holder to License to All Comers in Antitrust Case


By and on Nov 14, 2018
Posted In FTC Developments, IP Antitrust

Recently, a federal district court in California granted partial summary judgment for the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in an important intellectual property and antitrust case involving standard essential patents (SEP). The court’s decision requires an SEP holder to license its SEPs for cellular communication standards to all applicants willing to pay a fair, reasonable...

Continue Reading



THE LATEST: Just Because Your Deal Cleared Doesn’t Mean You’re in the Clear


By and on Mar 13, 2018
Posted In Mergers & Acquisitions, Private Litigation

Dealmakers know that a critical part of the merger process is obtaining antitrust clearance from government enforcers. But, even if the antitrust enforcers review and clear a transaction, a third-party can file a private suit alleging the transaction violated the antitrust laws. Recently, an aggrieved customer did just that—it won a substantial jury verdict and...

Continue Reading



Optical Illusion: Lack of Overcharge Evidence Yields Summary Judgment Victory for Optical Disk Drive Manufacturers


By , , and on Dec 29, 2017
Posted In Private Litigation

Manufacturers of optical disk drives defeated electronics companies’, retailers’ and indirect purchaser plaintiffs’ conspiracy claims after seven years of litigation. On December 18, 2017, the US District Court for the Northern District of California issued simultaneous orders that granted summary judgment in favor of defendants after finding that the electronics companies, retailers and indirect purchasers failed...

Continue Reading



Jury Gives Auto Parts Manufacturer a Pass on DOJ Conspiracy Claims


By , , and on Dec 12, 2017
Posted In Cartel Enforcement, DOJ Developments

On November 29, 2017, a Japanese auto parts manufacturer and its US subsidiary defeated the US Department of Justice’s claims that the companies conspired with others to fix prices and rig bids for automotive body sealing products. The case involved a rare trial involving criminal antitrust charges. After 13 days of trial, a jury returned...

Continue Reading



STAY CONNECTED

TOPICS

ARCHIVES