Antitrust Basics: Merger Enforcement


CLE credits earned: 2 GEN

This program will introduce participants to the basics of merger enforcement in antitrust law. Merger enforcement has been front-of-mind to federal and state antitrust regulators, and all signs indicate this trend will continue. We will discuss the pre-merger process, including filing obligations and process under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act. We will also introduce the body of law governing merger reviews, and discuss recent case law developments such as United States v. AT&T Inc. (the AT&T/Time Warner merger).

This course is co-sponsored by the Federal Bar Association.

Key topics to be discussed:

•   Introduction to the merger process, including pre-merger review, second requests, and enforcement actions
•   DOJ & FTC Reform Efforts
•   Substantive antitrust law on merger enforcement, including the DOF/FTC Horizontal Merger Guidelines
•   Issues raised in recent contested cases

Date / Time: December 11, 2018

•   10:00 am – 12:00 pm Eastern
•   9:00 am – 11:00 am Central
•   8:00 am – 10:00 am Mountain
•   7:00 am – 9:00 am Pacific

Choose a format:

•   Live Video Broadcast/Re-Broadcast: Watch Program “live” in real-time, must sign-in and watch program on date and time set above. May ask questions during presentation via chat box. Qualifies for “live” CLE credit.
•   On-Demand Video: Access CLE 24/7 via on-demand library and watch program anytime. Qualifies for self-study CLE credit. On-demand versions are made available 7 business days after the original recording date and are view-able for up to one year.

All Access Pass: Before you buy, access this class and all other myLawCLE programs, over 120 new live classes every year, for only $69 dollars per month. Purchase the All Access Pass first. Click here for more information.

Select your state to see if this class is approved for CLE credit.

Choose the format you want.


SKU: N/A Categories: ,
Original Broadcast Date: December 11, 2018

Matthew S. Wheatley, Esq. is an associate in Goodwin’s Antitrust & Competition Law practice. Mr. Wheatley’s practice focuses on helping companies obtain clearance for proposed transactions from the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission. He also counsels clients in assessing the potential antitrust risk of transactions as well as reportability under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act (HSR). Mr. Wheatley also has experience counseling and defending clients on civil non-merger matters arising under the antitrust and consumer protection laws.

Mr. Wheatley’s relevant experience includes:

• Advising clients in complying with Second Requests issued by the U.S. antitrust authorities
• Representing third-party witnesses in FTC and DOJ antitrust investigations
• Counseling companies and trade associations on antitrust compliance
• Defending health insurer in multidistrict ligation alleging antitrust violations under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act
• Defending major energy company in multi-state investigations and litigation alleging fraud, unjust enrichment, and false claims

Mr. Wheatley is a member of the American Bar Association’s Section of Antitrust Law. Prior to joining Goodwin, Mr. Wheatley was an associate at a Chambers-ranked antitrust practice in Washington, D.C. He also served as a law clerk to the Honorable Ted Stewart of the United States District Court for the District of Utah. While in law school, he worked as a law clerk at the Federal Trade Commission in the Bureau of Competition and in the office of Commissioner Maureen K. Ohlhausen.

Brian Desmarais, Esq. is an associate in Goodwin’s New York office. Mr. Desmarais’ practice focuses on counseling clients on antitrust matters, including premerger filing obligations under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act (HSR) and representation before government antitrust authorities. He has experience representing clients in merger reviews conducted by the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Justice, and state enforcement agencies. In addition to advising clients in mergers and acquisitions, Mr. Desmarais also counsels clients on antitrust compliance and private antitrust litigation actions.

Mr. Desmarais’ recent experience includes antitrust counseling for clients across several industries, including healthcare, SaaS, life sciences, financial services, electronics, and manufacturing.

Mr. Desmarais is a member of the New York State Bar Association’s Antitrust Section & Mergers Committee, and of the American Bar Association’s Section of Antitrust Law.

Prior to joining Goodwin, he was a Paralegal Specialist in the United States Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division.

Accreditation Policy
myLawCLE seeks accreditation for all programs in all states. (Accreditation for paralegals sought thru NALA and NFPA paralegal associations.) Each attending attorney/paralegal will receive a certificate of completion following the close of the CLE program as proof of attendance. In required states, myLawCLE records attorney/paralegals attendance, in all other states attorney/paralegal is provided with the approved CLE certificate to submit to their state bar or governing association.

Automatic MCLE Approvals
All myLawCLE CLE programs are accredited automatically either directly or via reciprocity in the following states: AK, AR, CA, CT, FL, HI, ME, MO, MT, ND, NH, NM, NJ, NY, WV, and VT. (AZ does not approve CLE programs, but accepts our certificates for CLE credit.)

Applied MCLE Approvals
myLawCLE seeks approval via application in all other states that are not automatically approved through myLawCLE’s state accreditation. (Some states may take up to 4 weeks to send in final accreditation, however attendees will receive accreditation according to the date the class was taken—the state of VA may take up to 12 weeks.)

Accreditation on Formats: Live Video Broadcasts, “Live” Re-Broadcasts and On-Demand CLEs

Live Video Broadcasts
Live video broadcasts are new live CLE programs being streamed and recorded for the first time. All of these programs qualify for “Live” CLE credit in all states except NV, OH, MS, IN, UT, PA, GA, and LA —these states require in-person attendance to qualify for “Live” CLE credit.

“Live” Re-Broadcasts
“Live” Re-broadcasts are replays of previous recorded CLE programs, set on a specific date and time and where the original presenting speakers calls in live at the end of the event to answer questions. This “live” element allows for “live” Re-broadcast CLEs to qualify for “Live” CLE credits in most states. [The following states DO NOT allow for “live” CLE credits on re-broadcast CLEs: NV, OH, MS, IN, UT, PA, GA, and LA]

On-Demand CLEs
On-demand CLE classes are available 24/7 via the myLawCLE portal. Attendance to these classes is monitored and recorded via our login process and a certificate of completion is issued upon the close of viewing the program. These CLEs can be viewed at anytime and only qualify for self-study CLE credits.

Many states allow for credit to be granted on a 1:1 reciprocal basis for courses approved in another mandatory CLE jurisdiction state. This is known as a reciprocity provision and includes the following states: AK, AR, HI, CT, FL, ME, MO, MT, ND, NH, NM, VT, NJ, NY, and WV. myLawCLE does not seek direct accreditation of live webinars or teleconferences in these states.

myLawCLE Credit Guarantee
Additionally, on all online CLE programs application for approval will be made in all states where attending attorneys are primarily licensed in. If a registered attorney does not receive credit from their state for any reason, a full refund will be granted.

Section I. Merger Review Process
a) Pre-merger review at the FTC and the DOJ
b) HSR what? Filing under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act
c) Second Requests for Information by the FTC and DOJ
d) DOJ & FTC process reform efforts
e) Enforcement Actions

Section II. Antitrust Merger Law
a) Clayton Act basics
b) FTC/DOJ Horizontal Merger Guidelines

Section III. Recent case developments
a) AT&T/Time Warner Decision
b) Other contested cases

Section IV. Multi-Jurisdictional Review
a) Role of foreign jurisdiction in pre-merger review
b) Role of foreign jurisdictions in enforcement actions