Insights
Search Results
Alerts
7.30.26
DOJ Revives Targeted Second Requests for Merger Review
On July 23, 2026, the Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division announced a return to “targeted” Second Request investigations and published a revised model timing agreement. The agreement offers an optional “Expedited Consideration” process potentially allowing investigations to be resolved without a full Second Request production. Under the expedited procedures, parties produce a limited set of documents, data, and information relevant to particular issues and concerns raised by the Antitrust Division. If the targeted production is sufficient to resolve the DOJ’s concerns, the investigation may be terminated without full Second Request compliance. In addition, the targeted production may provide a context for potential settlement negotiations. If concerns remain, the DOJ may require further productions, either of the full Second Request specifications or on modified terms.
Newsletters
7.29.26
European Antitrust Bimonthly Bulletin – May/June 2026
The firm is pleased to distribute the European Antitrust Bimonthly Bulletin, which distills the major antitrust developments in Europe over the past two months into concise and actionable takeaways. Companies operating in, or transacting with, Europe should take note of this quarter's developments in merger enforcement, digital markets regulation, and AI-related antitrust scrutiny.
Alerts
7.14.26
UK Consumer Protection Flies High as CMA Enforces Against Unfair Pricing Practices
Since receiving new powers under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCCA), the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has pursued an aggressive consumer protection agenda. As previously reported, this began with a series of pricing investigations launched in November 2025, the first of which concluded in April 2026.
Alerts
7.10.26
The FTC After Slaughter: What Businesses Need to Understand
On June 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Trump v. Slaughter, where the six-Justice majority held that appointed agency officials who wield executive power are subject to presidential removal. In so holding, the Court overruled its 1935 decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, 295 U.S. 602 (1935), which for nearly a century stood for the principle that Congress can create independent agencies whose leaders can only be removed for cause.
Alerts
6.26.26
FTC Conditions Aurobindo’s Acquisition of Lannett on Divestiture of Four Generic Drugs
On June 18, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that it would allow Aurobindo Pharma Limited’s approximately $250 million acquisition of Lannett Company, Inc. to proceed, subject to a proposed consent order requiring Aurobindo to divest four overlapping generic pharmaceutical products to Quagen Pharmaceuticals, LLC. The Commission voted 2-0 to issue an administrative complaint and accept the consent agreement for a 30-day public comment period.
Bylined Articles
6.22.26
Wilson Sonsini Partners Co-Author Chapter in Third Edition of GCR Data & Antitrust Guide
Wilson Sonsini partners Cédric Burton, Deirdre Carroll, and Maneesha Mithal, along with associates Michelle Zang and Hattie Watson, and Gil Zhang and Michael Han of Fangda Partners, have co-authored a chapter in the third edition of the GCR Data & Antitrust Guide examining the accelerating convergence of data protection, competition, artificial intelligence (AI), and cybersecurity regulation across major jurisdictions. The chapter, “Regulators Target AI as Evolving Technology Threatens Fair Competition in the Digital Economy,” highlights a widespread recognition that traditional privacy and antitrust frameworks are increasingly insufficient on their own to address data-driven market power and AI-enabled competition concerns. In response, regulators are adopting a wide range of approaches, from sector-specific and self-regulatory models to highly prescriptive ex ante regimes.
Alerts
6.10.26
New York Legislature Passes Ban on Personalized Pricing
Last week, the New York State Legislature passed the One Fair Price Act (S.8623B/A.9349B) (the Act), a bill that prohibits businesses from using personal data—such as purchase history, browsing history, real-time location, income, or inferred household size—to generate individual prices for consumers. While the Act bans so-called “surveillance pricing,” or personalized pricing, companies may still use “dynamic pricing” algorithms, subject to a modified disclosure requirement, so long as the algorithm does not set prices based on consumer personal data. The bill now awaits the signature of Governor Kathy Hochul, who has until December 31, 2026, to act.
Client Highlights
6.01.26
Wilson Sonsini Advises Credo on Regulatory Matters Related to Acquisition of DustPhotonics
On May 28, 2026, Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd (Credo), an innovator in providing connectivity at scale through fast, reliable, and energy-efficient system solutions, announced that it has completed its acquisition of DustPhotonics in a transaction valued up to $1.3 billion. DustPhotonics brings industry-leading silicon photonics photonic integrated circuit (SiPho PIC) technology for optical connectivity, deepening Credo’s optical interconnect portfolio across 800G, 1.6T, and 3.2T near-packaged optics (NPO) and co-packaged optics (CPO). Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati advised Credo on regulatory matters related to the transaction.
Alerts
5.19.26
Agri Stats Settlement Clarifies DOJ Views on Information Sharing
On May 7, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division and six state attorneys general filed a proposed Final Judgment to resolve antitrust claims against benchmarking and consulting firm Agri Stats, Inc. (Agri Stats). Agri Stats collects, processes, and distributes benchmarking data to broiler chicken, pork, and turkey processing operations. The reports are based on non-public pricing, profitability, and cost data submitted by meat processors. While Agri Stats purported to aggregate and anonymize the data, the DOJ alleged that those receiving the reports could identify who submitted the non-public data, allowing participants to raise prices.
Bylined Articles
5.18.26
Law360 Article: “CMA's Actions Signal New Spotlight on UK Consumer Law”
Wilson Sonsini attorneys Deirdre Carroll, Andrew Morrison, and Tom Evans authored a recent Law360 article titled "CMA's Actions Signal New Spotlight on UK Consumer Law." The piece examines the recent substantive fining decision against the Automobile Association (AA), the UK’s leading motoring association, by the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). The authors offer practical compliance guidance for businesses selling to UK consumers, covering price transparency, online review integrity, subscription model reform, and employee training on CMA outreach, with a note that the potential introduction of a consumer class action regime could further raise the stakes for non-compliance.