Stefan M. Meisner Stefan M. Meisner

Subscribe to Stefan M. Meisner's Posts
Stefan M. Meisner provides legal services to clients in connection with antitrust matters and electronic discovery issues. Stefan focuses his antitrust practice on complex, multidistrict class action litigation alleging Sherman Act violations, US Department of Justice (DOJ) investigations, merger investigations and intellectual property issues. He counsels clients on the antitrust implications of patent licensing and settlements of infringement litigation. In addition, he counsels clients on global strategies for addressing cartel prosecutions and defenses, from the inception of government investigations, to the initiation of civil class action litigation in a variety of jurisdictions. Read Stefan M. Meisner's full bio.

THE LATEST: DOJ Reaches Settlement with Six Broadcast Television Companies

By and on Nov 19, 2018
Posted In Cartel Enforcement, DOJ Developments, Mergers & Acquisitions

The Department of Justice (DOJ) and six broadcast television companies reached settlements last week after the DOJ claimed that the companies shared competitively sensitive information that allowed the parties to alter the way prices were set in the television spot advertising market. Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim explained in a speech at the ABA Antitrust...

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

Healthcare and Antitrust Enforcement: Continuity through the Administrations

By and on Oct 26, 2018
Posted In DOJ Developments, FTC Developments, Mergers & Acquisitions

Antitrust laws protect competition and consumers. Antitrust enforcement is prevalent in actions concerning manufacturing and consumer goods, among other things. However, recent enforcement activity by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division (DOJ) serves as a reminder that the services industry, particularly healthcare services, is not immune to antitrust scrutiny as...

Continue Reading

Supreme Court Clarifies Principles of International Comity in Vitamin C Ruling

By and on Jun 15, 2018
Posted In Cartel Enforcement, Chinese Developments, Private Litigation, U.S. Supreme Court Developments

Alert: The Supreme Court clarified the principles of international comity this week in a ruling pertaining to the long-running vitamin C antitrust class action litigation. International comity is the recognition a nation shows to the legislative, executive or judicial acts of another nation. Principles of comity state that US courts should defer to the laws...

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

THE LATEST: Non-Infringement of a Patent Also Not an Antitrust Injury

By and on Dec 18, 2017
Posted In IP Antitrust, Private Litigation

WHAT HAPPENED: Wading into the merging streams of antitrust and patents, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld dismissal of an antitrust suit where a jury verdict in a parallel case found no patent infringement. Cascades Computer Innovation, LLC v. RPX Corp. and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Case No. 16-15782 (9th Cir.,...

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

THE LATEST: FTC Acting Chairman Ohlhausen Signals Potentially Reduced Role for Antitrust Oversight of Intellectual Property Disputes

By and on Oct 23, 2017
Posted In FTC Developments, IP Antitrust

WHAT HAPPENED On Friday, October 13, acting FTC chairman Maureen Ohlhausen delivered a speech at the Hillsdale College Free Market Forum titled, “Markets, Government, and the Common Good,” highlighting her view on the intersection between IP and antitrust domestically and abroad. Chairman Ohlhausen’s position, that IP rights must be vigorously protected, is in line with...

Continue Reading

DOJ Prosecution of Heir Location Service Providers Dismissed on Statute of Limitations Grounds

By , and on Sep 11, 2017
Posted In DOJ Developments

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division’s criminal case against an heir location service provider collapsed when the US District Court for the District of Utah ruled that the government’s Sherman Act § 1 case was barred by the statute of limitations. The court held that the alleged conspiracy ceased when the alleged conspirators...

Continue Reading

Supreme Court to Patent Holders: Sell Product Anywhere, Exhaust Patent Rights Everywhere

By , and on Jun 1, 2017
Posted In IP Antitrust

Reversing long-standing Federal Circuit precedent, the United States Supreme Court has now held that a patentee extinguishes its patent rights on a product upon its sale of that product, regardless of (1) whether the patentee placed a restriction on the sale (prohibiting reuse or resale), or (2) whether the sale occurred within the United States....

Continue Reading