DOCSLIB.ORG

GCR’S Largest Government Antitrust Survey

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
GCR’S Largest Government Antitrust Survey US GOVERNMENT ANTITRUST Washington, DC’s leading firms for government antitrust On the occasion of the 59th annual ABA Spring Meeting, Rachel Bull and Ron Knox visited Washington, DC to conduct GCR’s largest government antitrust survey N 10 March, the public relations team at Howrey LLP sent out a five-paragraph press release, delivering the news that many in the legal world had expected for weeks. OBob Ruyak, the firm’s chairman, did not mince his words. “The firm had experienced disappointing financial performance over the past two years and subsequently several partners had resigned,” Ruyak said. “This resulted in the conclusion that an orderly wind-down of the firm’s activities over time was the only practical alternative.” And with those two sentences, the largest antitrust group in the world was no more. Howrey’s demise meant sweeping changes throughout the global antitrust bar – none more significant than those in Washington, DC. The loss of Howrey meant the gain of top- flight talent and clients for other local practices. In some cases those practices had antitrust presences in markets outside the state but had the room – and lack of conflicts – to take on big teams from the former powerhouse. Those haven’t been the only changes since GCR last surveyed the DC antitrust landscape. Leading antitrust groups have taken on new talent as former enforcers moved into private practice; firms with major presences in Europe have pushed into the district’s upper echelon; and a renewed taste for blockbuster deals in a healing economy has given the best teams a constant flow of work. 14 GLOBAL COMPETITION REVIEW US GOVERNMENT ANTITRUST Elite former FTC bureau of competition director David Wales, whom they The antitrust team at Arnold & Porter LLP remains a highly consider a future star. Partner John Majoras, who splits his time respected and prominent player on the Washington, DC bar, with between Washington, DC and the firm’s office in Cincinnati, says five of its partners in the 2011Who’s Who of Competition Lawyers that the team has “ongoing plans to grow.” and Economists. Partner Deborah Feinstein was voted “Lawyer of Majoras says that the firm bills a good portion of its hours by the Year” by her peers in the 2011 GCR Awards. attracting the antitrust components of deals being handled by other It may also have something to do with the firm’s presence on firms’ corporate divisions. Regardless of where the Jones Day team’s the most high-profile deals of the past 12 months. These include work comes from, its docket is extensive and impressive. Over the AT&T/T-Mobile, Comcast/NBC, Intel/Mcafee and Air Products past year, the team has been involved in some of the largest and & Chemicals/Airgas. The firm has around 15 civil litigations on its longest-running antitrust class actions and litigations in the country, books: including in the cathode ray tubes, municipal derivatives and including cases that were either appealed to, or heard by, the Supreme cement industries. It is also active in a range of non-cartel government Court. investigations, including for Visa in the DoJ’s interchange case and Meanwhile, the team at Latham & Watkins LLP has done for agricultural company Monsanto. Former FTC competition nothing but impress over the past year or so. While the firm’s DC bureau director William Baer remains head of the practice, which antitrust practice is relatively lean at the top – seven partners and is one of the largest in this survey with 30 partners, 10 consultants three counsel take the lead – it has punched above its weight and led and 43 associates. Arguably, no antitrust team in Washington, DC, has impressed as much as the team from Howrey’s demise meant sweeping Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP over the past two years. Always at or near the top of changes throughout the global the table, Cleary’s competition says the practice rivals any in the district. “You always see Cleary antitrust bar – none more significant and they’re always good,” a lawyer at a rival firm says. than those in Washington, DC The seven-partner DC practice handles a full range of antitrust issues, from courtroom work to mergers and the way or partnered with its antitrust shops in New York and San investigations before the federal US agencies. The team also works Francisco to handle top-tier matters. Who’s Who nominees Margaret seamlessly with the firm’s other top-tier competition practices in M Zwisler, Michael G Egge and senior litigator Abbott “Tad” B Europe and elsewhere. “It’s about as integrated as you can possibly Lipsky Jr feature prominently. get, on both a personal and professional level,” says partner Michael Over the past year, the team has been involved in two of the five Lazerwitz. US multi-district antitrust class actions, multiple complex merger The DC team features four International Who’s Who of filings and several cartel cases. But no case was more representative Competition nominees, all of whom work on the most high profile of the team’s year than its defence of pharmaceutical company deals in the country. Among them, the team acts for T-Mobile in Lundbeck in the FTC’s challenge of its completed purchase of a its proposed merger with AT&T, as well as Google in its myriad smaller rival. The court last year found that the FTC failed to define antitrust matters. a market and dismissed the case after a full trial on the merits – one The team at Hogan Lovells seem on fine and unified form post- of the few agency merger challenges to progress to that point. merger. Partner Janet L McDavid, who heads the practice, says one Head of the antitrust practice at O’Melveny & Myers LLP, of the firm’s strengths is coordinating global deals very quickly – such Richard Parker, says merger work has made a significant comeback as on Unilver’s decision to buy Alberto Culver. at the firm. Parker is advising Western Digital in its US$4.3 billion bid The Washington, DC group gained another partner recently to acquire Hitachi’s hard disk drive business and is counsel to Quest after Logan Breed was promoted last month. And Robert Robertson Diagnostics in several laboratory acquisitions. San Francisco-based joined the Washington, DC office from the FTC in September. partner Thomas Brown is leading the work for eBay on its purchase McDavid, Lynda Marshall and Joseph Krauss are all entrants in the of GSI Commerce. The firm is also active on several multi-district Who’s Who. litigations, including for Samsung in two separate proceedings and The team is present on a host of high-profile deals, including for in the fertiliser, air cargo and oil filter markets. ITA Software in its takeover by Google, which the DoJ cleared earlier Parker seems unaffected by the recent loss of former FTC chairman this month with remedies. It also advised Admob on its acquisition Timothy Muris and three other antitrust lawyers to Kirkland & Ellis by Google, and represented Verizon on its bid for cloud computing LLP. He says the team is scaling up and looking to make two lateral company Terremark. hires to add to the existing seven partners, seven counsel and five The team represented LabCorp in its successful defence of FTC associates. Antitrust litigator Thomas McCoy recently rejoined the litigation challenging its purchase of Westcliff Medical Laboratories, firm as a partner from Advanced Micro Devices. and is also advising on LabCorp’s purchase of Genzyme’s genetics According to partner Thomas Mueller, the antitrust team at testing business. Hogan Lovells is also advising Home City Ice in the Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP in Washington, DC class action multi-district litigation that has been consolidated in the had its most successful year to date in 2010 for case successes, Eastern District of Michigan. productivity and new clients – particularly in the technology and The roster of lawyers at the Washington, DC antitrust practice of pharmaceutical sectors. Standout matters include the Cisco/Tandberg Jones Day is among the most well-regarded and decorated in the bar. tie up that was cleared with remedies last March, and the FTC’s Partners Kathryn M Fenton, J Bruce McDonald, Phillip A Proger and Intel litigation, for which the firm acted as co-counsel with Gibson Joe Sims are all Who’s Who nominees, and the team recently added Dunn. The group also acts for Cephalon in what partner Eric Mahr www.globalcompetitionreview.com 15 US GOVERNMENT ANTITRUST says is the most active pay-for-delay case in the US, and is advising either merge, or form joint ventures that could have antitrust issues. Danaher on its US$6.8 billion buyout of Beckman Coulter. On the Although he’s often been recused, Barnett says the firm is active on cartel front, the practice advises clients in the air cargo, LCD, auto the cartel defence cases as well – and he’s been out of the government supplies, freight forwarding and private equity litigations. long enough to begin advising on newer investigations, including The group has eight partners. Among them, Mueller, James Lowe those in the chemicals and auto parts industries. and William J Kolasky all feature in the Who’s Who of Competition. Partners Randolph Smith, Robert Lipstein and Christopher Ondeck lead Crowell & Moring LLP’s 62-strong antitrust group in Highly Recommended Washington, DC. Lipstein says the team continues to hunt for yet Axinn Veltrop & Harkrider LLP partner and Who’s Who nominee more talent and that it’s among the firm’s “strategic imperatives” to John DeQ Briggs was one of the first, and most senior, defections grow the group.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nber Working Paper Series Did Robert Bork
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES DID ROBERT BORK UNDERSTATE THE COMPETITIVE IMPACT OF MERGERS? EVIDENCE FROM CONSUMMATED MERGERS Orley C. Ashenfelter Daniel Hosken Matthew C. Weinberg Working Paper 19939 http://www.nber.org/papers/w19939 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 February 2014 The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the Federal Trade Commission or the National Bureau of Economic Research. We are grateful for financial support from the Industrial Relations Section, Princeton University. We would like to thank Pauline Ippolito and Paul Pautler for their assistance, and Dennis Carlton and Sam Peltzman for helpful comments and suggestions. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer- reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2014 by Orley C. Ashenfelter, Daniel Hosken, and Matthew C. Weinberg. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Did Robert Bork Understate the Competitive Impact of Mergers? Evidence from Consummated Mergers Orley C. Ashenfelter, Daniel Hosken, and Matthew C. Weinberg NBER Working Paper No. 19939 February 2014 JEL No. K21,L1,L4,L41 ABSTRACT In The Antitrust Paradox, Robert Bork viewed most mergers as either competitively neutral or efficiency enhancing. In his view, only mergers creating a dominant firm or monopoly were likely to harm consumers. Bork was especially skeptical of oligopoly concerns resulting from mergers.
    [Show full text]
  • Interconnection
    Interconnection 101 As cloud usage takes off, data production grows exponentially, content pushes closer to the edge, and end users demand data and applications at all hours from all locations, the ability to connect with a wide variety of players becomes ever more important. This report introduces interconnection, its key players and busi- ness models, and trends that could affect interconnection going forward. KEY FINDINGS Network-dense, interconnection-oriented facilities are not easy to replicate and are typically able to charge higher prices for colocation, as well as charging for cross-connects and, in some cases, access to public Internet exchange platforms and cloud platforms. Competition is increasing, however, and competitors are starting the long process of creating network-dense sites. At the same time, these sites are valuable and are being acquired, so the sector is consolidating. Having facili- ties in multiple markets does seem to provide some competitive advantage, particularly if the facilities are similar in look and feel and customers can monitor them all from a single portal and have them on the same contract. Mobility, the Internet of Things, services such as SaaS and IaaS (cloud), and content delivery all depend on net- work performance. In many cases, a key way to improve network performance is to push content, processing and peering closer to the edge of the Internet. This is likely to drive demand for facilities in smaller markets that offer interconnection options. We also see these trends continuing to drive demand for interconnection facilities in the larger markets as well. © 2015 451 RESEARCH, LLC AND/OR ITS AFFILIATES.
    [Show full text]
  • Data Loss Prevention Shines 49
    ‘Corrective action’ for IT slacker 6 | Xen backers unite 11 | EMC buys e-discovery 12 A case for flash storage 45 | Where data loss prevention shines 49 THE BUSINESS VALUE OF TECHNOLOGY SEPT. 7, 2009 Hybrid Clouds The right formula’s slowly coming together p.15 Also: Hard data on 12 cloud providers p.37 informationweek.com [PLUS] THE INteRNet OF THINGS A special 16-page handbook A United Business Media Publication® CAN $5.95, US $4.95 p. HB1 Copyright 2009 United Business Media LLC. Important Note: This PDF is provided solely as a reader service. It is not intended for reproduction or public distribution. For article reprints, e-prints and permissions please contact: Wright’s Reprints, 1-877-652-5295 / [email protected] THE BUSINESS VALUE OFC TECHNOLOGYONTENTS Sept.7, 2009 Issue 1,240 2 Links COVER STORY Research And Connect InformationWeek’s Analytics Hybrid Clouds Reports, events, and more 15 Getting your data center to work with public cloud 6 Global CIO services isn’t easy By Bob Evans Virginia puts IT supplier on “corrective action plan”—we What’s In The should all be so lucky! 3377 Public Cloud 8 How 12 vendors are CIO Profiles delivering on infrastructure Availability Is Crucial as a service How good a service is doesn’t matter if customers can’t get to it, says VeriSign’s CTO Oracle Puts 11g On The Grid 11 QuickTakes Oracle upgrades database with VMware Wants It All data center grid features Vendor tries to get more cloud providers to use its software by 13 Google’s Down,Not Out challenging Xen When Gmail went offline,
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    FINANCIAL AND CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY PERFORMANCE 2012 ANNUAL REPORT THE WORL D’S BIGGEST CHALLEN GES DESERVE EVEN BIGGER SOLUTIONS. { POWERFUL ANSWERS } FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS $115.8 $33.4 $0.90 $2.20 $2.24 $1.975 $2.030 $110.9 $31.5 $0.85 $2.15 $1.925 $106.6 $29.8 $0.31 CONSOLIDATED CASH FLOWS REPORTED ADJUSTED DIVIDENDS REVENUES FROM OPERATING DILUTED EARNINGS DILUTED EARNINGS DECLARED PER (BILLIONS) ACTIVITIES PER SHARE PER SHARE SHARE (BILLIONS) (NON-GAAP) CORPORATE HIGHLIGHTS • $15.3 billion in free cash flow (non-GAAP) • 8.4% growth in wireless retail service revenue • 4.5% growth in operating revenues • 607,000 FiOS Internet subscriber net additions • 13.2% total shareholder return • 553,000 FiOS Video subscriber net additions • 3.0% annual dividend increase • 17.2% growth in FiOS revenue • 5.9 million wireless retail connection net additions • 6.3% growth in Enterprise Strategic Services revenue • 0.91% wireless retail postpaid churn Note: Prior-period amounts have been reclassified to reflect comparable results. See www.verizon.com/investor for reconciliations to U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) for the non-GAAP financial measures included in this annual report. In keeping with Verizon’s commitment to protect the environment, this report was printed on paper certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). By selecting FSC-certified paper, Verizon is making a difference by supporting responsible forest management practices. CHAIRMAN’S LETTER Dear Shareowner, 2012 was a year of accelerating momentum, for Verizon and the communications industry. The revolution in mobile, broadband and cloud networks picked up steam—continuing to disrupt and transform huge sectors of our society, from finance to entertainment to healthcare.
    [Show full text]
  • Pentland-Computational-Antitrust
    ARTICLE Time for a New Antitrust Era: Refocusing Antitrust Law to Invigorate st Competition in the 21 Century Robert Zev Mahari,* Sandro Claudio Lera,** & Alex Pentland*** Abstract. U.S. antitrust laws have repeatedly responded to the changing needs of the nation’s economy. As the marketplace grows ever more data-driven, we find ourselves at yet another critical economic juncture that requires us to revisit antitrust practices to ensure healthy and sustainable competition. In this article, we propose two new antitrust approaches that fit into the existing regulatory landscape, detect signs of anticompetitive behavior early, and handle the unique nature of the digital marketplace. First, we advocate for an expanded definition of monopoly power under the Sherman Act that takes corporate data ownership into account. While current proxies for monopoly power, namely market share and price control, are symptoms of anticompetitive behavior, data ownership is increasingly its harbinger. Second, we advocate for an expanded premerger review process that seeks to prevent nascent competitors from being swallowed up by dominant players, a widespread practice that can be shown to reduce competitiveness. To this end, we leverage new insights from network science and empirical data to anticipate which types of mergers are most likely to have anticompetitive effects. Finally, we propose scalable regulatory strategies to discourage the anticompetitive behaviors we describe in their incipiency, without requiring case-by-case review. * Graduate student, Human Dynamics Group, MIT Media Lab and JD Candidate, Harvard Law School. ** Assistant professor at the Shenzhen-based ETH Zurich-SUSTech Risks-X Institute and visiting researcher at MIT Connection Science and Human Dynamics.
    [Show full text]
  • Mergers and Acquisitions
    Mergers and Acquisitions Antitrust Eric E. Johnson ericejohnson.com Konomark Most rights sharable Kinds of mergers • Horizontal mergers • Vertical mergers • Conglomerate mergers 1 Potential benefits of mergers • All kinds of efficiencies • Economies of scale • Preserving firms that would fail • The list is endless ... Potential problems with mergers • Unilateral effects – market/monopoly power of the merged firm • Oligopoly effects – concentration of a market that can cause prices to increase, either through: • purely self-interested/independent decision- making of firms, or • oligopolistic coordination (e.g., legal “conscious parallelism”) • According to research, five significant firms in a market tends to be enough to prevent oligopolistic coordination 2 Potential problems with mergers • Unilateral effects – market/monopoly power of the merged firm • Oligopoly effects – concentration of a market that can cause prices to increase, either through: • purely self-interested/independent decision- making of firms, or • oligopolisticis a coordinationmagic number (e.g., legal ... 5“conscious parallelism”) • According to research, five significant firms in a market tends to be enough to prevent oligopolistic coordination Applicable law • Mergers and acquisitions can be challenged under Sherman Act 1 or 2, or FTC Act 5, but generally they are challenged under the Clayton Act 7. • Clayton Act 7 allows the blocking of mergers and acquisitions where “the effect of such ... may be to substantially lessen competition, or tend to create a monopoly.” 3 Hart-Scott-Rodino Act 15 USC 18a Pre-merger filing with DOJ/FTC is required where: • the stock acquisition value exceeds $50M and the acquirer and target have assets or annual sales in excess of $10M for one and $100M for the other (either way), OR • the stock acquisition value exceeds $200M Amounts are in 2004 dollars.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2018
    2018 Annual Report 4 A Message from the Chair 5 A Message from the Director & President 6 Remembering Keith L. Sachs 10 Collecting 16 Exhibiting & Conserving 22 Learning & Interpreting 26 Connecting & Collaborating 30 Building 34 Supporting 38 Volunteering & Staffing 42 Report of the Chief Financial Officer Front cover: The Philadelphia Assembled exhibition joined art and civic engagement. Initiated by artist Jeanne van Heeswijk and shaped by hundreds of collaborators, it told a story of radical community building and active resistance; this spread, clockwise from top left: 6 Keith L. Sachs (photograph by Elizabeth Leitzell); Blocks, Strips, Strings, and Half Squares, 2005, by Mary Lee Bendolph (Purchased with the Phoebe W. Haas fund for Costume and Textiles, and gift of the Souls Grown Deep Foundation from the William S. Arnett Collection, 2017-229-23); Delphi Art Club students at Traction Company; Rubens Peale’s From Nature in the Garden (1856) was among the works displayed at the 2018 Philadelphia Antiques and Art Show; the North Vaulted Walkway will open in spring 2019 (architectural rendering by Gehry Partners, LLP and KXL); back cover: Schleissheim (detail), 1881, by J. Frank Currier (Purchased with funds contributed by Dr. Salvatore 10 22 M. Valenti, 2017-151-1) 30 34 A Message from the Chair A Message from the As I observe the progress of our Core Project, I am keenly aware of the enormity of the undertaking and its importance to the Museum’s future. Director & President It will be transformative. It will not only expand our exhibition space, but also enhance our opportunities for community outreach.
    [Show full text]
  • Allocating the Burden of Persuasion for Entry Issues in the Government's
    ALLOCATING THE BURDEN OF PERSUASION FOR ENTRY ISSUES IN THE GOVERNMENT’S HORIZONTAL MERGER CASES Dave Rosenberg* INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1937 I. ENTRY IN THE LARGER PUZZLE OF MERGER ENFORCEMENT LITIGATION ........................................................................................ 1939 II. THE APPROACH OF THE ANTITRUST DIVISION AND THE COMMISSION TO ENTRY ANALYSIS ................................................... 1940 A. Bain vs. Stigler: The Early Economic Theories on Entry .......... 1940 B. The Antitrust Division and Commission Side with Bain ............ 1943 C. Game Theory Enters into Entry Philosophy – Strategic Entry Deterrence and the Role of Sunk Costs ........................... 1944 D. Entry Under the 1992 Merger Guidelines ................................. 1946 1. How the 1992 Merger Guidelines Discuss Entry ................ 1946 2. Entry Analysis as Performed Under the 1992 Merger Guidelines ............................................................................ 1949 III. METHODS FOR ALLOCATING THE BURDEN OF PERSUASION ............. 1951 IV. APPLYING THE BURDEN ALLOCATION METHODS TO ENTRY ............ 1953 A. Relative Knowledge ................................................................... 1953 B. The Schaffer Argument .............................................................. 1957 1. Precedent Before Syufy and Baker Hughes ......................... 1958 2. Syufy – The Agencies’ Committed Entry Analysis Gets Off
    [Show full text]
  • Supplemental Showing Pursuant To: 101.103 (D) Frequency Coordination Procedures
    Supplemental Showing Pursuant To: 101.103 (d) Frequency Coordination Procedures Reference: Fixed Wireless Holdings, LLC Clearwire Spectrum Holdings LLC Clearwire Spectrum Holdings II, LLC Clearwire Spectrum Holdings III, LLC Clearwire Hawaii Partners Spectrum LLC Job Number: 111214COMSTI01 NC−CLT288A − NC−CLT048A, NC ; NC−CLT076A − NC−CLT263D, NC ;NC−CLT245F − NC−CLT242A, NC ; NC−GSB090B − NC−GSB072C, NC ;NC−GSB034B − NC−GSB031A, NC ; TX−DAL5954B − TX−DAL0189B, TX; NC−GSB075B − NC−GSB097A, NC ; NC−CLT032B − NC−CLT002A, NC; NC−CLT254F − NC−CLT289A, NC ; NC−RAL018A − NC−RAL006A, NC; NC−RAL241A − NC−RAL198A, NC ; NC−RAL041A − NC−RAL025A, NC; NC−RAL096A − NC−RAL107A, NC ; NC−RAL146A − NC−RAL0256A, NC ; NC−GSB0150A − NC−GSB104B, NC ; NC−GSB998A − NC−GSB040A, NC ; TX−DAL0010A − TX−DAL6175B, TX ; MA−BOS5372A − MA−BOS5808A, MA; MA−BOS5514A − MA−BOS6183A, MA ; NC−GSB060A − NC−GSB062A, NC ; NC−GSB068B − NC−GSB997A, NC ; NC−GSB088A − NC−GSB085A, NC ; NC−GSB097A − NC−GSB099C, NC ; NC−GSB108B − NC−GSB119A, NC ; NC−GSB999A − NC−GSB030A, NC ; NC−RAL015C − NC−RAL008A, NC ; NC−RAL025A − NC−RAL018A, NC ; NC−RAL050A − NC−RAL042A, NC ; NC−RAL096A − NC−RAL095A, NC ; NC−RAL998A − NC−RAL022D, NC ; HI−HON056A − HI−HON0130A, HI ; GA−ATL991A − GA−ATL584A,GA ; TX−AUS0100A − TX−AUS0125A, TX ; TX−AUS0179A − TX−AUS0130A, TX ; TX−AUS0232A − TX−AUS0058B, TX ; TX−AUS0025A − TX−AUS0081A, TX ; IL−CHI0505 − IL−CHI0957A, IL ; NC−GSB105A − NC−GSB0150A, NC ; NC−RAL055A − NC−RAL051A, NC ; FL−JCK079A − FL−JCK125A, FL ; RED998 − RED007, CA ; FL−JCK057A − FL−JCK225A, FL ; PA−PHL062A
    [Show full text]
  • Pennsylvania ENERGY STAR Fact Sheet
    PENNSYLVANIA April 2017 ® Families and businesses are saving with the help of ENERGY STAR Pennsylvania is home to more than 519 businesses and organizations participating in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s ENERGY STAR program: 81 manufacturers of ENERGY STAR certified products 32 companies supporting independent certification of ENERGY STAR products and homes 83 companies building ENERGY STAR certified homes, three of which are committed to building 100% ENERGY STAR as well as many businesses, school districts, governments, and faith-based groups using ENERGY STAR resources to reduce energy waste in their facilities. Across the state of Pennsylvania 5,654,291 customers are served by ENERGY STAR utility partners U.S. Steel Tower, Pittsburgh, PA. 22,107 homes have earned the ENERGY STAR ENERGY STAR Certified in 2016. 19,501 buildings (nearly 1.8 billion square feet) have been benchmarked using EPA’s ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager State Spotlights 1,033 buildings have earned the ENERGY STAR for superior efficiency, including 284 schools, 16 hotels, 7 hospitals, Air King America offers one of the most complete lines of 274 office buildings, and 4 industrial plants ENERGY STAR qualified ventilation products on the market including Bathroom Exhaust Fans, Continuous Operation Exhaust Fans, Inline Exhaust, Under Cabinet and Chimney Recent Partner of the Year Winners Range Hoods. Air King America Brandywine Realty Trust “It’s an honor to be recognized again by the EPA for our EnergyCAP Inc innovative energy efficiency solutions that are helping our Liberty Property Trust customers save energy and money every day.” – Craig North Penn School District Adams, President and CEO, PECO PECO PPL Electric SEPTA's Headquarters in Center City Philadelphia, built in Ricoh USA, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Antitrust Year in Review
    2016 ANTITRUST YEAR IN REVIEW AUSTIN BEIJING BOSTON BRUSSELS HONG KONG LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PALO ALTO SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SHANGHAI WASHINGTON, DC WILMINGTON, DE WSGR 2016 Antitrust Year in Review Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Mergers ............................................................................................................................................... 2 U.S. Trends ................................................................................................................................... 2 Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) Act Compliance ............................................................................... 2 Lessons from the Merger Year in Review ................................................................................. 3 Merger Enforcement Under the Trump Administration .............................................................. 4 International Insights ..................................................................................................................... 5 European Union (EU) ............................................................................................................... 5 China....................................................................................................................................... 7 Agency Investigations .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 70, No. 96/Thursday, May 19, 2005/Notices
    28902 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 96 / Thursday, May 19, 2005 / Notices and Idaho Panhandle Zone is adjusting new regulations published in the (2) suitability of areas for various the forest plan revision process from Federal Register of January 5, 2005 (70 purposes; and (3) objectives to help compliance with the 1982 land and FR 1062). move toward the desired conditions. resource management planning Public Involvement: Scheduled This phase of collaboration is expected regulations to compliance with new meetings and details of other public to be completed by fall of 2005. regulations published in the Federal involvement opportunities will be Time Schedule: The remaining forest Register of January 5, 2005 (70 FR posted on the Western Montana plan revision schedule will be 1062). Planning zone Web site, at http:// approximately as follows: This adjustment will result in the www.fs.fed.us/rl/wmpz/. To get on the • Fall 2005: Release proposed forest following: mailing list contact Claudia Narcisco at plans and start 90-day public comment 1. The Responsible Official will now (406) 329–3795, or e-mail, period. be the Forest Supervisors. [email protected]. People currently on • Summer 2006: Release final forest 2. Each National Forest will establish the mailing list will remain. plans and start 30-day public objection an Environmental Management System FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lee period. prior to a decision on the revised forest Kramer, Interdisciplinary Team Leader, • Fall 2006: Issue final decision and plans. Lolo National Forest, Fort Missoula, start plan implementation. 3. The emphasis on public Bldg., 24, Missoula, MT 59084, (406) The web site provides additional involvement will shift from comment on 392–3848 or e-mail, [email protected]; information regarding the decision to a range of alternative plans, to iterative or see the Web site at http:// transition to the new planning public-Forest Service collaboration, www.fs.fed.us/rl/wmpz/.
    [Show full text]