9/18/2013 Business Week: AMR-US Airways Unions Meet U.S. Official on Merger Suit
Category Archives: Latest Firm News
GeyerGorey LLP’s Allen Grunes quoted in Washington Post: “AMR, US Airways Attack U.S. Merger Suit as Bad for Consumers.”
AMR, US Airways Attack U.S. Merger Suit as Bad for Consumers
David McLaughlin and Sara Forden
Sep 11, 2013 11:52 am ET
Sept. 11 (Bloomberg) — American Airlines and US Airways Group Inc. defended their proposed merger against a U.S. antitrust lawsuit, saying the combination would generate more than $500 million a year in benefits to consumers.
The combined airline will create an effective competitor to Delta Air Lines Inc. and United Continental Holdings Inc., the airlines said in filings yesterday in federal court in Washington arguing that the U.S. effort to stop the deal should be denied.
“It is the complaint — by interposing the heavy hand of federal and state regulation — which will lessen competition by precluding the market from creating new and competitive flight options for passengers,” Tempe, Arizona-based US Airways said.
The U.S. Justice Department, joined by seven states and the District of Columbia, are suing American parent AMR Corp. and US Airways to block the merger, arguing the tie-up would reduce competition and hurt consumers. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly has scheduled the case to go to trial beginning Nov. 25.
The U.S. and the attorneys general argue the proposed merger, by reducing the number of legacy carriers from four to three, would increase the likelihood of coordinated behavior among the airlines, leading to higher fares and fees and diminished service. American and US Airways can compete effectively on their own, the government has said.
Service Cuts
The main issue in the case is whether the merger would lead to cuts in service and increases in domestic fares, said Allen Grunes, a lawyer with GeyerGorey LLP in Washington who formerly worked in the Justice Department’s antitrust division.
“The American and U.S. Airways answers paint a picture of the merger as some kind of silver bullet that will miraculously transform the two companies into the greatest thing since sliced bread,” he said. “That’s more than a little optimistic, and it’s going to be tough for them to prove it.”
The merger, which would create the world’s largest airline, forms the basis for American’s plan to exit bankruptcy protection and pay creditors. Fort Worth, Texas-based AMR filed for bankruptcy in November 2011 and reached the merger agreement with US Airways in February.
“We believe this merger would result in consumers paying more for airfares and receiving less service,” Gina Talamona, a spokeswoman for the Justice Department’s antitrust division, said in an e-mail. “The department’s lawsuit seeks to maintain competition in the airline industry.”
More Competition
American said in its court filing that the deal with US Airways would create a more competitive airline industry that would give passengers more choices.
The U.S. complaint “concocts an imaginary narrative where airlines tacitly collude and where prices are higher than in the past, but the real facts are just the opposite,” American said.
US Airways said the U.S. complaint improperly focuses on maintaining the number of legacy carriers, “those airlines that, prior to 1978, endured the well-documented failure of federal regulation of routes and fares.” Those carriers are by most relevant measures the least financially successful companies in the industry, US Airways said.
Low-Cost Competition
The U.S. ignores the effect on the airline industry of low- cost carriers including Southwest Airlines Co. and JetBlue Airways Corp., according to the filing. The success of those airlines is the “most meaningful competitive development” in the industry since deregulation, US Airways said.
During the past 12 years, American lost $10.3 billion and US Airways lost $3.4 billion, according to the filing by US Airways. US Airways has been in bankruptcy twice in that period.
“Blocking the merger will not sharpen competition — it will prolong this cycle of crisis to the detriment of passengers, the employees of American and US Airways, and the communities the airlines serve,” US Airways said.
The case is U.S. v. US Airways Group Inc., 13-cv-01236, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).
United States and Switzerland Issue Joint Statement Regarding Tax Evasion Investigations Switzerland Encourages Its Banks to Cooperate with New Program Which Will Require Significant Financial Penalties and Information Sharing from Banks That Aided Secret Account Holders
The Department of Justice today announced a program that will encourage Swiss banks to cooperate in the department’s ongoing investigations of the use of foreign bank accounts to commit tax evasion. The department also released a joint statement with the Swiss Federal Department of Finance, stating that Switzerland will encourage its banks to participate in the program.
“This program will significantly enhance the Justice Department’s ongoing efforts to aggressively pursue those who attempt to evade the law by hiding their assets outside of the United States,” said Attorney General Eric Holder. “In addition to strengthening our partnership with the Swiss government, the program’s requirement that Swiss banks provide detailed account information will improve our ability to bring tax dollars back to the U.S. treasury from across the globe.”
“This program will provide us with additional information to prosecute those who used secret offshore bank accounts and those here and abroad who established and facilitated the use of such accounts,” said Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole. “Now is the time for all U.S. taxpayers who hid behind Swiss bank secrecy laws or have undeclared offshore accounts in other foreign countries to come forward and resolve their outstanding tax issues with the United States.”
Under the program, which is available only to banks that are not currently under criminal investigation by the department for their offshore activities, participating Swiss banks will be required to:
- Agree to pay substantial penalties
- Make a complete disclosure of their cross-border activities
- Provide detailed information on an account-by-account basis for accounts in which U.S. taxpayers have a direct or indirect interest
- Cooperate in treaty requests for account information
- Provide detailed information as to other banks that transferred funds into secret accounts or that accepted funds when secret accounts were closed
- Agree to close accounts of account holders who fail to come into compliance with U.S. reporting obligations
Banks meeting all of the above requirements will be eligible for non-prosecution agreements. Banks currently under criminal investigation related to their Swiss banking activities, and all individuals, are expressly excluded from the program.
The program holds banks to a higher degree of responsibility for opening secret accounts after it became publicly known that the department was actively investigating offshore tax evasion in Switzerland. Under the penalty provisions of the program, banks seeking a non-prosecution agreement must agree to a penalty in an amount equal to 20 percent of the maximum aggregate dollar value of all non-disclosed U.S. accounts that were held by the bank on Aug.1, 2008. The penalty amount will increase to 30 percent for secret accounts that were opened after that date but before the end of February 2009 and to 50 percent for secret accounts opened later than that.
The program will significantly assist the department’s efforts to investigate and prosecute U.S. taxpayers who, when faced with the risk of detection, chose to move funds away from banks under investigation to banks that they believed might be better havens for tax secrecy. A key component of the program requires cooperating banks to provide information that will enable the United States to follow the money to other Swiss banks and to banks located in other countries.
The program also provides a path to resolution for Swiss banks that were not engaged in wrongful acts with U.S. taxpayers but nonetheless want a resolution of their status. Most banks in this category will be asked to provide an internal investigation report prepared by an independent examiner, as well as any additional information requested by the department. A smaller group of banks will be allowed to show that they met certain criteria for deemed-compliance under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). Banks in these two groups will be eligible to receive non-target letters.
The program is intended to enable every Swiss bank that is not already under criminal investigation to find a path to resolution. It also creates significant risks for individuals and banks that continue to fail to cooperate, including for those Swiss banks that facilitated U.S. tax evasion but fail to cooperate now, for all U.S. taxpayers who think that they can continue to hide income and assets in offshore banks, and for those advisors and others who facilitated these crimes.
Since 2009, the department has charged more than 30 banking professionals and 68 U.S. accountholders with violations arising from their offshore banking activities. Fifty-four U.S. taxpayers and four bankers and financial advisors have pled guilty, and five taxpayers have been convicted at trial. One Swiss bank entered into a deferred prosecution agreement, and a second Swiss bank was indicted and pleaded guilty. Currently, the department is actively investigating the Swiss-based activities of 14 financial institutions. The department’s enforcement activities are global and have also included public actions concerning activities in India, Luxembourg, Israel and the Caribbean.
The program does not address current or future investigations and pending cases concerning bank employees, financial advisors and other individuals. The department will address each of these cases only with the individual’s counsel, in a manner that gives consideration to the particular facts and circumstances of each case. In those cases in which indictments are pending, any resolution will also require addressing outstanding issues with the court. Counsel for banks currently under investigation, individuals who have been indicted, or bank employees who are concerned about whether they have potential criminal liability should contact the department’s Tax Division or the prosecutors handling their case if they wish to seek resolution.
The department notes that the joint statement with the Swiss Federal Department of Finance provides that if personal data are provided, they should only be used for purposes of law enforcement, which may include regulatory action, in the United States or as otherwise permitted by U.S. law. Additionally, the department has assured its Swiss counterparts that it understands that simply because the names of individuals are included in the information that it receives from a bank does not necessarily mean that any particular individual is or is not culpable of wrongdoing. The support that Switzerland has shown for this program may also help those banks already under investigation take some of the steps necessary to reach a resolution.
“Banks that come forward under the program that we have announced today have the opportunity to reach a resolution with the United States,” said Assistant Attorney General for the Tax Division Kathryn Keneally. “The program will give us yet more information to pursue U.S. taxpayers who are continuing to hide their assets in offshore accounts, and creates significant risks for those Swiss banks that fail to come forward. We recognize and express our appreciation for Switzerland’s support of the program.”
“The program the Department of Justice announced today is another positive step forward in the U.S. government’s continuing efforts to combat offshore tax evasion,” said Danny Werfel, Acting Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service. “On behalf of the IRS, I extend my appreciation to both the Justice Department and the Swiss government for developing a way forward that provides the United States with information that will be critical to the enforcement of our tax laws and will bring closure for Swiss banks that meet the requirements of the program.”
Southwest Seen Overlooked as U.S. Seeks to Block AMR Deal
“If the Justice Department defines Southwest and JetBlue out of the market, they’ve got to have good documentary and economic evidence to support that allegation,” said Grunes, the former Justice Department lawyer. Baer, the U.S. antitrust chief, “would not allow it to be in the complaint otherwise.”
Southwest Seen Overlooked as U.S. Seeks to Block AMR Deal
By Mary Schlangenstein
August 23, 2013 12:01 AM EDT
Law 360: DOJ’s Airline Merger Challenge Recalls AT&T Fight
DOJ’s Airline Merger Challenge Recalls AT&T Fight
GeyerGorey LLP Issues Updated Representative Matters List; Experience is Wide and Deep
Representative Matters
Our attorneys have led and participated in some of the highest profile matters in the past decade, both while in the government and in private practice. We have been involved in the most significant criminal cartel cases, the most important mergers, the most notable civil antitrust investigations, the largest procurement fraud cases, and game-changing antitrust cases that reached the United States Supreme Court. Our collective experience stands as a testament to our work ethic, our drive for excellence, and the trust and responsibility we have been given by our clients and the government.
International Cartels:
- Led investigation and prosecution of marine contractors engaged in conspiracy to suppress and eliminate competition to install deep sea oil platforms
- Led investigation and prosecution of international freight forwarders engaged in conspiracy to fix prices on international air cargo shipments
- Led investigation and prosecution of household-goods moving contractors engaged in conspiracy to fix prices for international moving services provided to Department of Defense
- Investigation and prosecution of graphite electrodes manufacturers
- Investigation and prosecution of ocean shipping companies
- Investigation and prosecution of a FTSE 250 engineering company that resulted in the indictment, extradition and conviction of its former chief executive
- Defended foreign construction company in investigation and prosecution of alleged billion-dollar bid rigging scheme, in related qui tam litigation, and in other related matters
- Defended foreign vitamin manufacturers in investigations and prosecutions of alleged international price-fixing agreements
- Defended foreign specialty chemical manufacturers in investigations and prosecutions of alleged international price-fixing agreements
- Defended U.S.-based executive of foreign company in criminal and civil litigation related to his alleged role in an international cartel to fix prices in the marine supply industry
- Defended foreign executive of foreign company in criminal and civil litigation related to his alleged role in the conspiracy to fix air cargo rates around the world
- Defended international freight forwarder in criminal litigation related to its alleged role in an international conspiracy to rig bids on U.S. military shipping contracts
- Investigation and subsequent prosecution of foreign vitamin manufacturers for price fixing conspiracy
Domestic Price Fixing and Bid Rigging:
- Defended electrical products manufacturer in first felony prosecution under the Sherman Act and in civil treble damage litigation
- Represented a class of nurses in litigation against a hospital association and a number of Arizona hospitals
- Represented the State of Ohio against a number of dairies for allegedly rigging bids of school milk
- Investigation and prosecution of highway paving contractors in multiple districts for bid rigging
- Investigation and prosecution of military insignia providers supplying the Army Air Force Exchange System with over 4,000 items of insignia
- Represented metal drum manufacturer in prosecution for price fixing
- Investigation of polypropylene bag manufacturers and that resulted in the prosecution of a manufacturer for Buy American Act violations and conspiracy to defraud
- Investigation and prosecution of nearly 40 cases against paving contractors for conspiring to rig bids in connection with federal and state highway and airport contracts
- Investigation and prosecution of an auction rigging conspiracy involving auto parts to by the Department of Defense at Defense Reutilization Marketing Offices (DRMO)
- Investigation and prosecution of multiple electrical construction contractors for conspiring to rig bids for major power wiring contracts associated with steel mills and waste water treatment plants
- Investigation and prosecution of multiple wholesale grocery companies and bid managers for rigging bids to school districts, hospitals and jails in southern Texas
- Investigation and prosecution of multiple dairies for rigging bids for school milk sold to districts in Louisiana
- Investigation and prosecution of crawfish processors for fixing prices paid to crawfish farmers and fishermen
- Investigation and prosecution of bribery conspiracy involving the reconstruction of the New Orleans levee system after Hurricane Katrina
- Investigation and prosecution of fire protective services company and its president
- Investigation and prosecution of an Iraq-based general construction bid rigging scheme
- Investigation and prosecution of conspiracy to solicit kickback scheme involving security services on a US Agency for International Development contract
- Investigation and prosecution of fuel theft from an overseas United States military facility
- Investigation and prosecution of a Europe-based scheme to defraud the Iraqi government by facilitating the fraudulent claim for payment of armored vehicles that were never delivered
- Represented individual accused of defrauding government defense agency out of hundreds of thousands of dollars of grant money
- Represented company accused of defrauding government by failing to supply vitamin-enriched food products with the proper level of enrichment
- Represented large computer software company in internal investigation of improper influence on government contracting process
General Criminal:
- Defended CEO and three closely-held companies in a multi-state racketeering and tax fraud prosecution
- Investigation and prosecution of multiple labor racketeering cases ranging from prosecutions of United Mine Worker Union officials for theft of union funds used to pay for the murder of a political opponent of the union president to the prosecution of two Boston-based racketeers for actions associated with their travel to California in connection with a union organizing effort at a San Rafael newspaper
- Investigation and prosecution of the mayor of a New Jersey town for taking bribes in connection with the permitting of a tank farm at the terminus point of a major Gulf Coast to East Coast pipeline
- Investigation and prosecution of the most prolific serial bank robber in United States history
- Investigation and prosecution of the murder for hire of a government witness and one of the largest cocaine importation conspiracies East of the Mississippi River
- Investigation and prosecution of numerous gun, drug and false identity cases
- Investigation and prosecution of multiple obstructions of justice, contempt, false statement, witness tampering and perjury cases arising out of grand jury investigations
- Investigation and prosecution of bank fraud cases
- Represented individuals before the District of Columbia Court of Appeals in appeals from criminal convictions (more than a dozen cases)
- Defended individual in intelligence community in investigation by DCIS for alleged violations of public corruption statutes (18 U.S.C §§ 207 & 208)
- Defended individual in criminal investigation by Inspector General of NASA
- Defended individual in federal bribery investigation
- Defended government contractor in investigation by the Inspector General of the Department of Agriculture
- Defended several regional hospitals in various unrelated federal investigations of allegedly fraudulent billing practices, Stark violations
- Represented hospital CEO in investigation of alleged Stark violations
- Represented pathology laboratory in healthcare fraud investigation
- Represented national healthcare company in investigation of allegedly criminal off-label marketing
- Represented various individuals in applications for presidential pardons
Mergers and Acquisitions:
- Represented Warner Music in connection with the proposed acquisition of EMI by Universal Music
- Represented DISH Network in opposition to the proposed acquisition of T-Mobile by AT&T
- Represented Merck in connection with its acquisition of Schering Plough
- Represented Simon Properties in connection with its acquisition of Prime Outlets
- Obtained antitrust clearance in the acquisition of Liquid Container by Graham Packaging
- Obtained consent decree against nuclear engineering firm which had acquired another firm with the same engineering specialty
- Represented major home healthcare provider in acquisition valued in excess of $500 million
- Represented pathology laboratory in merger valued in excess of $100 million
- Represented foreign mining company in acquisition of US coal mines valued over $1 billion
- Represented hospital management company in acquisition valued in excess of $500 million
- Represented individual in several acquisitions of stock each valued in excess of $100 million
- Represented major over-the-counter pharmaceutical company in four different acquisitions over several years whose values ranged from over $100 million to over $500 million
- Represented national restaurant chain in acquisition valued at about $1 billion
- Represented regional hospital chain in acquisition of a hospital valued above $50 million
- Represented hospital valued in excess of $100 million in sale to state hospital system
Civil Antitrust Matters:.
- Defended large telecommunications provider in three week trial for alleged exclusionary conduct directed towards telecom services resellers.
- Represented large telecommunications provider as plaintiff in case alleging monopolization of market for telecom switch software.
- Represented leading music copyright licensing organization in a decade-long investigation by the Department of Justice
- Led the investigation of Ticketmaster at the Department of Justice
- Led major, successful prosecution by United States Department of Justice of conspiracy among twenty-four leading market-makers in NASDAQ stocks, including Goldman, Sachs & Co. and J. P. Morgan Securities, Inc. who had conspired to maintain spreads between buying and selling prices of NASDAQ stocks
- Defended large telecommunications provider in multi-year litigation brought by competitive telecom carrier alleging monopolization of market for high speed data services
- Led successful investigation and prosecution of Salomon Bros Inc. and two hedge funds, Caxton Corporation and Steinhardt Partners, LP, to limit the supply of two-year Treasury notes to the “repo,” or “repurchase agreement,” market
- Successfully brought the Reagan Administrations ‘s first challenge to a merger (brewing industry)
- Successfully represented the United States in a litigated matter challenging field of use restrictions in patent licensing agreement in specialty chemicals
- Successfully represented the United States in challenge to professional rules of conduct limiting competition among accountants in Texas
- Successfully represented the United States in challenge to acquisition by Texaco, Inc. of an independent oil refining company
- Represented high-tech electronic service provider with respect to antitrust issues in a bet-the-company patent infringement case
- Represented sporting goods manufacturer in vacating a consent decree
- Represented leading music copyright pool in civil antitrust investigation leading to vacating of an earlier consent decree and modification of another consent decree
- Represented hospital CEO in litigation arising from denial of physician staff privileges
Antitrust Compliance Counseling:
- Advised large telecommunications provider on its price and product bundling
- Advised large telecom provider in connection with a joint venture of three carriers to entire the mobile payments market with mobile phones
- Advised major manufacturer of household appliances on antitrust compliance
- Advised major manufacturer of high-end kitchen appliances on antitrust compliance
- Advised major manufacturer of over-the-counter pharmaceutical on antitrust compliance
- Advised regional airport on state action doctrine and compliance with antitrust laws
- Advised national trade association on antitrust compliance and Noerr-Pennington doctrine
- Advised international shipping company on compliance regarding competition, fraud, and foreign corrupt practices
- Advised African government on contracting and anti-fraud and anti-corruption best practices
Other Civil Litigation:
- Represented Haiti in multinational investigation and litigation leading to the recovery of money stolen by its former president Jean-Claude Duvalier
- Represented developers in multiple appeals involving alleged illegal cooperative conversion terms
- Defended law firm in $10 million professional malpractice action
- Defended various healthcare providers in numerous different federal investigations of alleged fraud, related qui tam cases, and related whistleblower termination actions
- Defended CMS contractor in qui tam case
- Represented regional Medicare Advantage organization in suit against the U.S. Government
- Defended book distributor and publisher in defamation case
- Defended author in defamation case
- Represented gaming company in civil rights action relating to state gaming regulations
- Defended copyright and trademark owner in intellectual property litigation
- Defended local retailer of gray market goods in trademark infringement litigation
- Represented major multinational corporation in suit seeking refund of local corporate franchise tax
- Represented government contractor in appeal of denial of security clearance
- Defended employers in cases alleging violation of wage-and-hour statute
- Represented developers in multiple appeals involving alleged illegal cooperative conversion terms
- Defended employer in case alleging employment discrimination
- Defended employer in case alleging sexual harassment
- Defended employers in cases alleging unlawful discharge
Experience by Industry:
- Air Cargo
- Aircraft Parts (Domestic)
- Airlines
- Airport Contracts
- Automobile Dealers (Domestic)
- Airlines
- Asset Forfeiture
- Auction Rigging (Multiple Industries)
- Banking (International)
- Baked Goods (Domestic)
- Baking Soda
- Book Publishing
- Bridge Construction
- Carbon Products
- Caustic Soda
- Cell Towers (Domestic)
- Chemicals (Multiple Products, Domestic and International)
- Clothing and Textiles (Multiple Products, Domestic and International)
- Computer Software
- Construction (Domestic and International)
- Copyright and Trademark
- Dairy Products
- Deep sea Oil Platforms
- Democratization Programs
- Electrical Products
- Embassy Construction
- Engineering
- Export-Import Bank Clients (Multiple Industries, International)
- Food Service Contracts (Multiple Industries, Domestic and International)
- Financial Institutions (Domestic and International)
- Fire Protection Services
- Freight Forwarding (Domestic and International)
- Fuel Supply (Domestic and International)
- General Construction (Multiple Industries, Domestic and International)
- Government Contracts (Multiple Industries, Domestic and International)
- Graphite Electrodes
- Highway Construction
- Hospitals
- Housing Foreclosure Auctions (Domestic)
- Information Technology (Multiple Industries, Domestic and International)
- Industrial Gases (Domestic and Multiple Products)
- LIBOR
- Marine Contractors
- Medical Products (Multiple Products, Domestic and International)
- Metal Drums
- Military Insignia (International)
- Military Moving and Storage
- Mining and Related Products (Multiple Industries, Domestic)
- Motor Vehicles (Domestic)
- Municipal Bonds (Multiple Industries, Domestic and International)
- Nursing
- Ocean Shipping (International)
- Oilfield Supplies
- Pharmaceuticals (Multiple Products, Domestic and International)
- Polypropylene bags
- Rock Salt
- Seafood
- Security Contracts
- School District Contracts (Multiple Industries)
- Soda Ash
- Shipping (Multiple Industries, Domestic and International)
- Slag Removal
- Telecommunications
- Tobacco
- Translation Services
- Trucking
- US Agency for International Development Contractors and Grant Recipients
- Vitamins
- Warzone
- Waste Hauling
- Wholesale Groceries
- Wireless
- World Bank Contractors and Grant Recipients (International)
- Vitamins
Experience by Subject Matter:
- Antitrust (Civil and Criminal)
- Auction Rigging
- Bank Robberies (Domestic)
- Bank Fraud
- Bid-Rigging
- Bribery
- Buy American Act Violations
- Capital Crimes
- Cartels (Multiple Products, Domestic and International)
- Cash Smuggling (International, multiple procurements by multiple governments)
- Civil Merger and Non-Merger Cases (Multiple Products, Multiple Industries Domestic and International)
- Civil Rights Actions
- Competition Advocacy
- Contempt
- Contracting Fraud
- Corporate Defense (Multiple Industries, Domestic and International)
- Criminal Conspiracies
- Defamation
- Disaster Fraud
- Drug Cartels and Trafficking
- Embezzlement
- Employment Law
- False Claims
- False Statements
- Federal Trade Commission Matters
- Firearms and Weapons Offenses (Domestic and International)
- Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) (Multiple Industries)
- Forgery
- Fuel Theft
- Grant Fraud (Multiple Industries, Multiple Agencies, Domestic and International)
- Hart-Scott-Rodino Pre-Merger Notification
- Health Care Fraud (Compliance, Organizational Defense, Whistleblowers)
- Kickbacks
- Identity Theft
- Intellectual Property
- Mail Fraud
- Market Allocation
- Mergers and Acquisitions
- Money Laundering (Multiple Industries, Domestic and International)
- Monopolies (Multiple Industries, Domestic and International)
- Murder for Hire
- Non-governmental Organizations (International)
- Obstruction of Justice
- Overseas Contingency Operations
- Perjury
- Presidential Pardons
- Price Fixing
- Procurement Fraud (Multiple Industries, Domestic and International)
- Professional Malpractice Defense
- Public Corruption
- Qui Tam Matters
- Racketeering
- Securities Fraud
- Stark Violations
- Tax Fraud (International, Domestic and State)
- Territorial Allocation
- Webb-Pomerene Organizations (International)
- Weapons Offenses (Domestic and International)
- Whistleblowers (Multiple Industries, Domestic and International)
- Wire Fraud
- Witness Tampering
“My take is this deal is dead” states Allen Grunes in Bloomberg: “AMR-US Airways Antitrust Suit Seen as Difficult to Settle”
From Bloomberg:
The challenge brought by the U.S. Justice Department can be compared with its lawsuit seeking to block AT&T Inc. (T)’s proposed takeover of T-Mobile USA Inc. in 2011, said Allen Grunes, an antitrust lawyer with GeyerGorey LLP. AT&T eventually dropped its bid for T-Mobile. “My take is that the deal is dead,” Grunes said. “Based on the complaint, this merger doesn’t look like it can be fixed with divestitures or slot sales.”
Read More By Clicking Below:
AMR-US Airways Antitrust Suit Seen as Difficult to Settle
“Upstart Start-Up” GeyerGorey LLP Opens Dallas Office
“Rocketing from two to eleven attorneys in eight months, GeyerGorey LLP sports over 200 years of cross-disciplinary prosecutorial experience involving a host of domestic and international industries where each of its attorneys has worked on internal investigations and high stakes cases for an average of more than 20 years.”
For more, click the link below:
-12191777-upstart-start-up-geyergorey-llp-opens-dallas-office
Allen P. Grunes: “Another Look at Privacy,” 20 Geo. Mason L. Rev. (Summer 2013)
Allen Grunes took a moment to discuss his latest law review article on the intersection of privacy and Antitrust Law and suggests its implications for the future:
“Another Look at Privacy, 20 Geo. Mason L. Rev. (Summer 2013)“
“Antitrust law does not often take privacy issues into account, even when construing ‘privacy’ in its broadest sense to include privacy policies, the collection and subsequent use or sale of personal information, and privacy regulation. Issues involving privacy and its flip side, “big data,” occasionally do surface in antitrust matters, but by and large they remain on the margin. There have been a handful of attempts to move privacy more toward the center of the antitrust universe, but they have not been very successful.
In this Article, I first discuss some of the challenges consumer privacy poses and why antitrust has had a difficult time with privacy considerations. Next, I discuss several arguments that a few brave souls have made urging that privacy should be more central to antitrust—especially when consumer data is at the center of a merger, as it was in Google/DoubleClick. I then look at some of the ways that, on the periphery, antitrust law does incorporate privacy issues. Finally, I offer what is hopefully a more nuanced and productive way of thinking about the issue based on several characteristics of online markets, and suggest a few interesting implications for the future.”
Maurice Stucke Quoted in Wall Street Journal’s “Merging Airlines, Concessions May Not Be Enough.”
Excerpt:
“In the case of United Airlines and Continental Airlines, the companies cleared the hurdle after agreeing to lease 18 daily “slot pairs” — the government-issued rights to take off and land – at Newark Liberty International Airport to Southwest Airlines.
‘The DOJ really drew a line in the sand,” said Mr. Stucke. “They basically looked at all of the consolidations up to this point and found that consumers haven’t significantly benefited but rather consumers have been harmed.'”
For entire article, click below:
For Merging Airlines, Concessions May Not Be Enough