Recent US Antitrust Developments
Publications
October 2022
President Biden’s antitrust enforcement leadership arrived promising aggressive enforcement. Today, more than a year in, they are beginning to make good on that promise. In a recent speech at Georgetown University, Deputy Attorney General Jonathan Kanter, head of the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice, reported that the DOJ is “firing on all cylinders.” The DOJ has challenged or obtained abandonment of six mergers and, according to Kanter, has the largest number of pending civil antitrust lawsuits in the last 20 years. While the pace of merger enforcement at the FTC under Chair Lina Khan has not yet exceeded that of the final year of her predecessor, merger enforcement is up in 2022, and with several high-profile investigations pending, the expectation is for aggressive enforcement to continue. Below are notable developments in two merger enforcement actions.
Illumina/Grail Challenge Rejected by FTC Administrative Law Judge
The FTC’s administrative law judge (ALJ) rejected the Commission’s challenge of the merger of Illumina and Grail. The FTC sought to block the $7.1 billion acquisition of Grail, a maker of early detection liquid biopsy test that can screen for multiple types of cancer in asymptomatic patients using DNA sequencing. Illumina is a provider of DNA sequencing for these multi-cancer early detection tests. The FTC alleged that the merged entity would have the incentive to disadvantage potential testing competitors by withholding or raising the cost of the DNA sequencing and as a result, the proposed acquisition would diminish innovation in the US market for such tests. The ALJ rejected this argument, another example of the government failing to prove harm in a vertical merger case, the most high-profile loss in recent memory being the DOJ’s failure to block AT&T’s merger with Time Warner. The decision has been appealed to the Commission pursuant to FTC rules, and any final Commission decision may be appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals. The FTC’s emphasis on protecting innovation is a theory of harm that will continue to be emphasized by the agency.
DOJ Challenges Merger of Two Residential Door Hardware Producers
On September 15, the Department of Justice sued to block ASSA ABLOY AB’s (ASSA ABLOY) proposed $4.3 billion acquisition of the Hardware and Home Improvement division of Spectrum Brands Holdings Inc (Spectrum). DOJ alleges that ASSA ABLOY and Spectrum are two of the three largest producers of residential door hardware, and that the transaction would result in anticompetitive harm in the form of higher prices, lower quality, reduced innovation, and poorer service in the sale of premium mechanical door hardware and smart locks. DOJ alleges that the transaction would give ASSA ABLOY a near-monopoly in premium mechanical door hardware and more than a 50% share in smart locks, leaving only one significant competitor. This theory focuses on the “unilateral effects” of the merger due to the elimination of a competitor, a theory of harm that will continue to play a prominent role in agency enforcement. Notably, the parties proposed to divest portions of ASSA ABLOY business units to remedy the transaction, but DOJ alleged that the proposed “divestitures would be insufficient to preserve the intensity of existing competition.”
この記事はThe Japan Practice Reportに掲載されました。The Japan Practice Reportを読む
Illumina/Grail Challenge Rejected by FTC Administrative Law Judge
The FTC’s administrative law judge (ALJ) rejected the Commission’s challenge of the merger of Illumina and Grail. The FTC sought to block the $7.1 billion acquisition of Grail, a maker of early detection liquid biopsy test that can screen for multiple types of cancer in asymptomatic patients using DNA sequencing. Illumina is a provider of DNA sequencing for these multi-cancer early detection tests. The FTC alleged that the merged entity would have the incentive to disadvantage potential testing competitors by withholding or raising the cost of the DNA sequencing and as a result, the proposed acquisition would diminish innovation in the US market for such tests. The ALJ rejected this argument, another example of the government failing to prove harm in a vertical merger case, the most high-profile loss in recent memory being the DOJ’s failure to block AT&T’s merger with Time Warner. The decision has been appealed to the Commission pursuant to FTC rules, and any final Commission decision may be appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals. The FTC’s emphasis on protecting innovation is a theory of harm that will continue to be emphasized by the agency.
DOJ Challenges Merger of Two Residential Door Hardware Producers
On September 15, the Department of Justice sued to block ASSA ABLOY AB’s (ASSA ABLOY) proposed $4.3 billion acquisition of the Hardware and Home Improvement division of Spectrum Brands Holdings Inc (Spectrum). DOJ alleges that ASSA ABLOY and Spectrum are two of the three largest producers of residential door hardware, and that the transaction would result in anticompetitive harm in the form of higher prices, lower quality, reduced innovation, and poorer service in the sale of premium mechanical door hardware and smart locks. DOJ alleges that the transaction would give ASSA ABLOY a near-monopoly in premium mechanical door hardware and more than a 50% share in smart locks, leaving only one significant competitor. This theory focuses on the “unilateral effects” of the merger due to the elimination of a competitor, a theory of harm that will continue to play a prominent role in agency enforcement. Notably, the parties proposed to divest portions of ASSA ABLOY business units to remedy the transaction, but DOJ alleged that the proposed “divestitures would be insufficient to preserve the intensity of existing competition.”
この記事はThe Japan Practice Reportに掲載されました。The Japan Practice Reportを読む
Related Articles
© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.
Publications
October 2022
President Biden’s antitrust enforcement leadership arrived promising aggressive enforcement. Today, more than a year in, they are beginning to make good on that promise. In a recent speech at Georgetown University, Deputy Attorney General Jonathan Kanter, head of the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice, reported that the DOJ is “firing on all cylinders.” The DOJ has challenged or obtained abandonment of six mergers and, according to Kanter, has the largest number of pending civil antitrust lawsuits in the last 20 years. While the pace of merger enforcement at the FTC under Chair Lina Khan has not yet exceeded that of the final year of her predecessor, merger enforcement is up in 2022, and with several high-profile investigations pending, the expectation is for aggressive enforcement to continue. Below are notable developments in two merger enforcement actions.
Illumina/Grail Challenge Rejected by FTC Administrative Law Judge
The FTC’s administrative law judge (ALJ) rejected the Commission’s challenge of the merger of Illumina and Grail. The FTC sought to block the $7.1 billion acquisition of Grail, a maker of early detection liquid biopsy test that can screen for multiple types of cancer in asymptomatic patients using DNA sequencing. Illumina is a provider of DNA sequencing for these multi-cancer early detection tests. The FTC alleged that the merged entity would have the incentive to disadvantage potential testing competitors by withholding or raising the cost of the DNA sequencing and as a result, the proposed acquisition would diminish innovation in the US market for such tests. The ALJ rejected this argument, another example of the government failing to prove harm in a vertical merger case, the most high-profile loss in recent memory being the DOJ’s failure to block AT&T’s merger with Time Warner. The decision has been appealed to the Commission pursuant to FTC rules, and any final Commission decision may be appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals. The FTC’s emphasis on protecting innovation is a theory of harm that will continue to be emphasized by the agency.
DOJ Challenges Merger of Two Residential Door Hardware Producers
On September 15, the Department of Justice sued to block ASSA ABLOY AB’s (ASSA ABLOY) proposed $4.3 billion acquisition of the Hardware and Home Improvement division of Spectrum Brands Holdings Inc (Spectrum). DOJ alleges that ASSA ABLOY and Spectrum are two of the three largest producers of residential door hardware, and that the transaction would result in anticompetitive harm in the form of higher prices, lower quality, reduced innovation, and poorer service in the sale of premium mechanical door hardware and smart locks. DOJ alleges that the transaction would give ASSA ABLOY a near-monopoly in premium mechanical door hardware and more than a 50% share in smart locks, leaving only one significant competitor. This theory focuses on the “unilateral effects” of the merger due to the elimination of a competitor, a theory of harm that will continue to play a prominent role in agency enforcement. Notably, the parties proposed to divest portions of ASSA ABLOY business units to remedy the transaction, but DOJ alleged that the proposed “divestitures would be insufficient to preserve the intensity of existing competition.”
この記事はThe Japan Practice Reportに掲載されました。The Japan Practice Reportを読む
Illumina/Grail Challenge Rejected by FTC Administrative Law Judge
The FTC’s administrative law judge (ALJ) rejected the Commission’s challenge of the merger of Illumina and Grail. The FTC sought to block the $7.1 billion acquisition of Grail, a maker of early detection liquid biopsy test that can screen for multiple types of cancer in asymptomatic patients using DNA sequencing. Illumina is a provider of DNA sequencing for these multi-cancer early detection tests. The FTC alleged that the merged entity would have the incentive to disadvantage potential testing competitors by withholding or raising the cost of the DNA sequencing and as a result, the proposed acquisition would diminish innovation in the US market for such tests. The ALJ rejected this argument, another example of the government failing to prove harm in a vertical merger case, the most high-profile loss in recent memory being the DOJ’s failure to block AT&T’s merger with Time Warner. The decision has been appealed to the Commission pursuant to FTC rules, and any final Commission decision may be appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals. The FTC’s emphasis on protecting innovation is a theory of harm that will continue to be emphasized by the agency.
DOJ Challenges Merger of Two Residential Door Hardware Producers
On September 15, the Department of Justice sued to block ASSA ABLOY AB’s (ASSA ABLOY) proposed $4.3 billion acquisition of the Hardware and Home Improvement division of Spectrum Brands Holdings Inc (Spectrum). DOJ alleges that ASSA ABLOY and Spectrum are two of the three largest producers of residential door hardware, and that the transaction would result in anticompetitive harm in the form of higher prices, lower quality, reduced innovation, and poorer service in the sale of premium mechanical door hardware and smart locks. DOJ alleges that the transaction would give ASSA ABLOY a near-monopoly in premium mechanical door hardware and more than a 50% share in smart locks, leaving only one significant competitor. This theory focuses on the “unilateral effects” of the merger due to the elimination of a competitor, a theory of harm that will continue to play a prominent role in agency enforcement. Notably, the parties proposed to divest portions of ASSA ABLOY business units to remedy the transaction, but DOJ alleged that the proposed “divestitures would be insufficient to preserve the intensity of existing competition.”
この記事はThe Japan Practice Reportに掲載されました。The Japan Practice Reportを読む
Related Articles
© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.
News and Insights
Event
Associate Steven Arango to Speak at the Veterans' Legal Career Fair
On September 18, Associate Steven Arango will speak on a panel at the Veterans' Legal Career Fair (VLCF), the only legal career fair in the United States dedicated to veterans, active-duty service members, and military spouses.
September 18, 2026
Publications
In American Banker, Partner Laurel Loomis Rimon Weighs in on OCC's Handling of Fintech Bank Charter Applications
Partner Laurel Loomis Rimon spoke with American Banker about how the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is approaching bank charter applications from fintechs, amid a growing wave of companies seeking charters from federal regulators.
August 18, 2026
Event
Partner David Greenwald to Speak at PLI Program on Privilege and AI
On August 17, David Greenwald will speak at "Fitting New “Tech” Into the Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Protection," a virtual program hosted by the Practising Law Institute (PLI).
August 17, 2026
Publications
Special Counsel Kimberly Cook Featured in FCBA Member Spotlight
The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) featured Kimberly Cook in its Member Spotlight series.
August 13, 2026
Recognition
Three Jenner & Block Partners Named to Crain's New York Business' 2026 Notable Leaders in Accounting, Consulting & Law List
Crain's New York Business recognized Jenner & Block Partners Anthony Barkow, Alison Stein, and Damian Williams among its 2026 Notable Leaders in Accounting, Consulting & Law.
August 10, 2026