Bona Law (San Diego)

Jarod Bona

Bona Law (San Diego)
CEO and Partner

Jarod Bona is principal at Bona Law, based in San Diego. He focuses his practice on antitrust and competition law, appellate litigation, business litigation, and challenges to government conduct. Before starting his own law firm in March 2014, he practiced with DLA Piper US (LLP) and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP for a dozen years. Mr. Bona is a graduate of Harvard Law School and a former law clerk on the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.


Linked authors

Bona Law (San Diego)
Bona Law (Detroit)
Bona Law (San Diego)
Bona Law (New York)
Bona Law (Minneapolis)


3845 Bulletin

Jarod Bona The US Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit overturns a District Court ruling which summarily dismissed a monopolisation claim by importing the incorrect standard from the refusal to deal caselaw in Aspen Skiing (Chase Manufacturing / Johns Manville)


The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit overturned a district court decision dismissing a federal monopolization claim brought by Chase Manufacturing d/b/a Thermal Pipe Shields (TPS). In its published opinion, the Tenth Circuit held that the district court erred in granting (...)

Jarod Bona The US District Court for the District of Columbia denies a Big Tech firm’s motion to dismiss the FTC lawsuit alleging an unlawful monopoly acquired through killer acquisitions and barring nascent competitors from their platform (Facebook)


Observations on the Court’s Rejection of Facebook’s Motion to Dismiss the FTC’s Amended Antitrust Complaint* The FTC filed an antitrust lawsuit against Facebook (now Meta Platforms Inc.). Judge James E. Boasberg dismissed it. The FTC then filed an amended complaint. And the same judge just (...)

Jarod Bona The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dismisses the class action brought on behalf of indirect purchasers alleging that a chip manufacturer abused its dominant position and concludes that the District Court of California had an interest in applying its antitrust law to deter its resident corporations from violating the antitrust laws (Qualcomm / Stromberg)


This article has been nominated for the 2023 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. When you defend antitrust class actions in federal court like we do, you often see a long list of state antitrust claims brought by what are called indirect (...)

Jarod Bona The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit rules on the co-conspirator exception to the Illinois Brick rule against distributors in the healthcare market (Marion Healthcare / Becton Dickinson & Company)


The Seventh Circuit Explains the “Co-Conspiracy Exception” to the Illinois Brick Rule in Healthcare Antitrust Lawsuit* Antitrust law evolves in such a way that opinions from federal appellate courts are always interesting in how they affect the doctrine. But there are a select few judges who (...)

Jarod Bona The US Supreme Court holds that App store consumers are direct purchasers of the Big Tech company and are thus not precluded from suing for damages under federal antitrust law (Apple / Pepper)


This article has been nominated for the 2021 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. This is part two of an article about the Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Apple v. Pepper, the classic antitrust cases of Illinois Brick and Hanover Shoe, (...)

Jarod Bona The US Supreme Court says that judges who determine foreign law in federal courts are not strictly bound by foreign government’s statements (Animal Science Products / Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical)


In an antitrust case deciding a non-antitrust-specific issue, the US Supreme Court held in Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co.(the Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation) that to determine foreign law in federal courts, judges are not strictly bound by that foreign (...)

Jarod Bona A US District Court grants preliminary injunction, reminding that if a group of competitors excludes another class of competitors, the question of whether competition is harmed turns on whether the excluded class offers competitive benefits to the market (Teladoc / Texas Medical Board)


Texas Federal Court Acts for Teladoc in Antitrust Case Against State Medical Board* It is easier to succeed in business without competition than with it. And if you are used to practicing your profession in a particular way, it is quite uncomfortable when new approaches develop that undercut (...)

Jarod Bona The US FTC approves two final orders settling charges that ski equipment manufacturers for many years illegally agreed not to compete for one another’s ski endorsers or employees (Marker Völkl / Tecnica Group)


The FTC Orders Ski-Equipment Companies to Start Competing Again* Sometimes competition is a real hassle. If your company has a loyal customer or longtime employee, you feel betrayed when a competitor swoops in to try to “steal them.” If you are the Miami Heat, you probably don’t like (...)

Jarod Bona The US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia denies motion to dismiss hearing in a case concerning an alleged exclusion from competing in health care markets (Dr. Yvoune Kara Petrie / Virginia Board of Medicine)


The Virginia Board of Medicine Violated the Antitrust Laws* Last week (17-23 March 2014) was a big antitrust week for the new law firm of Bona Law PC. First, it was the ABA Antitrust Spring Meeting, where antitrust lawyers from all over the world descend upon Washington, DC to obsess over (...)

Jarod Bona The US District Court for the Northern District of California grants class certification and gives its preliminary approval for a partial class action settlement of a lawsuit on the allegation of conspiracy to hold down salaries in Silicon Valley (High-Tech employees)


The Antitrust Laws Encourage Stealing* That’s right, the antitrust laws care so much about competition that they even prohibit agreements among competitors to not steal. In a society that morally condemns stealing, this is counter-intuitive (and a good reason to learn a little bit about (...)

Jarod Bona The US Supreme Court clarifies standing requirements under the federal trademark law with possible implications for the antitrust claims (Lexmark International / Static Control Components)


Will the Supreme Court’s Lexmark Standing Decision Lead Indirect-Purchaser Antitrust Plaintiffs to Federal Court?* While waiting for my flight to leave San Diego on my way to Washington, DC for the ABA Antitrust Spring Meeting, I saw on Twitter—the best source for immediate Supreme Court (...)

Jarod Bona The US Supreme Court grants petitions for writs of certiorari in a case dealing concerning whether a State regulatory board created by State law can be treated as a private actor under antitrust law (North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners)


Applying the Antitrust Laws to Anticompetitive State and Local Government Conduct* Update: The Supreme Court granted review in North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC on March 3, 2014 Lawyers, judges, economists, law professors, policy-makers, business leaders, trade-association (...)

Jarod Bona The US Supreme Court rejects the attempt to justify a restrictive practice on the basis of the potential threat that competition poses to public safety and professional ethics (National Society of Professional Engineers)


Classic Antitrust Cases: National Society of Professional Engineers v. United States, 435 U.S. 679 (1978)* As an antitrust attorney, over time you see the same major cases cited again and again. It is only natural that you develop favorites. Here at The Antitrust Attorney Blog, we will, from (...)


Total visits

Number of readings per contribution

Number of contributions

Author's ranking
In number of contributions
In number of visits
In average number of visits
Send a message