Tag Archives: Jonathan M. Moses

FTC Alleges “Serial Acquirer” Theory in Challenge to Consummated PE Deals

by Andrew J. Nussbaum, Jonathan M. Moses, Nelson O. Fitts, Adam L. Goodman, and Itai Y. Thaler

Photos of the authors

From left to right: Andrew J. Nussbaum, Jonathan M. Moses,  Nelson O. Fitts, Adam L. Goodman, and Itai Y. Thaler. (Photos courtesy of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz)

Last week, the Federal Trade Commission sued U.S. Anesthesia Partners, Inc. (“USAP”) and its private equity investor, Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe, as well as a number of Welsh Carson entities, in federal district court, alleging that USAP and Welsh Carson conspired to monopolize and reduce competition for anesthesia services in Texas.  The FTC’s complaint alleges that, beginning in 2012, Welsh Carson, through its investment in USAP — which varied between 23% and 50.2% over the relevant period — directed a “roll-up scheme” to acquire and consolidate over a dozen Texas anesthesia practices; caused price increases across the state; and coordinated prices and allocated markets with some of the remaining independent anesthesia providers.  The complaint claims violations of the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act, and the FTC Act, and seeks unspecified “structural relief” that could include restitution and divestitures.

Continue reading →

FTC Diminishes Role of Administrative Law Judge

by Jonathan M. Moses, Nelson O. Fitts, and Adam L. Goodman

Photos of the authors

From left to right: Jonathan M. Moses, Nelson O. Fitts, and Adam L. Goodman (Photos courtesy of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz)

Recently, the FTC quietly issued a final rule modifying its internal procedures to diminish the role of its Administrative Law Judge.  The ALJ adjudicates, among other things, the agency’s challenges to mergers and acquisitions under the antitrust laws.  The move is of a piece with the agency’s agenda under Chair Lina Khan—on which we have commented here, here, and here—and underscores the significance of numerous pending challenges to the constitutionality of the FTC’s in-house adjudicative process. 

Continue reading →

White Collar and Regulatory Enforcement: What to Expect in 2018

by John F. Savarese, Ralph M. Levene, Wayne M. Carlin, David B. Anders, Jonathan M. Moses, Marshall L. Miller, Louis J. Barash, and Carol Miller

Introduction

In our memo last year, we acknowledged that it was close to impossible to predict the likely impact that the newly elected Trump administration would have on white-collar and regulatory enforcement.  (White Collar and Regulatory Enforcement: What to Expect in 2017 (PDF: 240 KB)  Instead, we set out a list of initiatives we urged the new administration to consider, including clarifying standards for when cooperation credit would be given, reducing the use of monitors, and giving greater weight to a company’s pre-existing compliance program when exercising prosecutorial discretion, among other suggestions.  While the DOJ under Attorney General Jeff Sessions has, for example, taken some steps toward clarifying the applicable standards for cooperation and increasing incentives to disclose misconduct in the FCPA area, few other policy choices or shifts in approach have been articulated or implemented.  Continue reading →