Franklin M. Rubinstein

Partner

Antitrust and Competition

Comprehensive Antitrust Experience

Franklin represents clients in several areas, including merger review, government and criminal investigations, litigation, and antitrust-related counseling.
Experience with a Wide Range of Industries

Franklin has represented a diverse set of clients in the software, computer hardware, pharmaceutical, medical device, gaming, automobile, natural resource, internet, and media industries.
A Recognized Practitioner

Franklin has been recognized among the leading antitrust practitioners in Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business.

Franklin Rubinstein is an antitrust partner in the Washington, D.C., office. His practice encompasses a wide variety of antitrust matters, including mergers and acquisitions, investigations by the United States Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, litigation, criminal investigations, and counseling on issues such as distribution, monopolization, tying, exclusive dealing, price-fixing, and antitrust compliance. Franklin has represented a diverse set of clients in the software, computer hardware, pharmaceutical, medical device, gaming, automobile, natural resource, internet, and media industries.

Prior to joining the firm, Franklin was an associate at Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson.

Experience

Prior to joining the firm, Franklin was an associate at Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson.

Education

J.D., University of Chicago Law School, 2001Winner, Hispanic National Bar Association's 2001 Moot Court Competition; Recipient, Thomas R. Mulroy Prize for Excellence in Appellate Advocacy, University of Chicago Moot Court
B.A., Swarthmore College, 1997

Honors

Recognized in the 2021 edition of Global Competition Review/Who's Who Legal - Competition
Named in the 2015, 2016, and 2017 editions of Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business, in which he is recognized for his "strong reputation in the field, particularly for his representation of blue-chip technology companies" and sources praised his "sound judgment" and described him as "smart and even-tempered"

Admissions

Bar of the District of Columbia
State Bar of Maryland
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Credentials

Education

J.D., University of Chicago Law School, 2001Winner, Hispanic National Bar Association's 2001 Moot Court Competition; Recipient, Thomas R. Mulroy Prize for Excellence in Appellate Advocacy, University of Chicago Moot Court
B.A., Swarthmore College, 1997

Honors

Recognized in the 2021 edition of Global Competition Review/Who's Who Legal - Competition
Named in the 2015, 2016, and 2017 editions of Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business, in which he is recognized for his "strong reputation in the field, particularly for his representation of blue-chip technology companies" and sources praised his "sound judgment" and described him as "smart and even-tempered"

Admissions

Bar of the District of Columbia
State Bar of Maryland
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Select Publications

Co-author with B. Labow, "U.S. Unilateral Conduct," The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2014, Global Competition Review, 2014
Co-author with C. Biggio and S. Sher, "Brocade/McDATA: Structural Presumptions Didn't Tell the Whole Story," The Threshold, Spring 2007, Vol. 7, No. 2

Insights

Select Publications

Co-author with B. Labow, "U.S. Unilateral Conduct," The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2014, Global Competition Review, 2014
Co-author with C. Biggio and S. Sher, "Brocade/McDATA: Structural Presumptions Didn't Tell the Whole Story," The Threshold, Spring 2007, Vol. 7, No. 2

Recent Insights

Alerts

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has lost its long-running suit contending that Meta Platforms monopolized a “personal social networking” (PSN) market by acquiring Instagram and WhatsApp, two acquisitions that the FTC had previously reviewed and declined to challenge. Judge James Boasberg of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia held first, as a matter of law, that the relevant question was whether Meta has market power now, rather than when the suit was filed five years ago. Second, the court found that the FTC had failed to prove its relevant market (which the FTC alleged was essentially limited to Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat) and that, when competitors such as TikTok and YouTube were included, Meta lacked monopoly power.

Learn More

Alerts

On August 16, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed a motion in limine in its challenge to Kroger’s $24.6 billion acquisition of Albertsons alleging that Albertsons executives intentionally deleted text communications about the merger.¹ The FTC’s motion asked the court to infer that the executives’ allegedly deleted communications would have been harmful to the companies’ defense of the merger. In addition to seeking an adverse inference about the content of the responsive text messages, the FTC requested that the court “treat with skepticism” any trial testimony from certain Albertsons executives, including CEO Vivek Sankaran, about the effects of the proposed merger or the parties’ planned divestitures.²

Learn More