Stephen Wu is a partner in the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery and is based in the Firm’s Chicago office. He focuses his practice on complex litigation, mergers and acquisitions, and counseling clients on healthcare antitrust and pricing and distribution issues. Stephen has represented clients in a wide variety of industries including: health care, biotechnology, information technology, aerospace, consumer products, energy, and food. Stephen has defended clients in litigation against federal and state antitrust and unfair competition claims, and represented clients in criminal antitrust investigations. For mergers and acquisitions, Stephen has defended transactions before the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the United States Department of Justice. Besides healthcare antitrust and pricing and distribution issues, Stephen has also counseled clients on standards-setting and compliance with consumer protection laws. Prior to joining the Firm, Stephen was an attorney for the FTC, where he participated in all aspects of the FTC’s merger enforcement program, from investigating multibillion dollar transactions to negotiating consent orders resolving the government’s competition concerns. At the FTC, he received an Award for Meritorious Service and its Stephen Nye Award, the FTC’s highest award given to a junior attorney, in 2001. Stephen is admitted to practice in Illinois and before the U.S. District Courts for the Northern and Southern Districts of Illinois, the Eastern District of Michigan, the Northern District of Ohio, and the United States Courts of Appeals for the Sixth and Seventh Circuits. Stephen is also a member of the American Bar Association’s Section of Antitrust Law, and has for several years served as a faculty member for the Practicing Law Institute’s Annual Antitrust Law Institute. He is also an active member of the Asian American Bar Association of Greater Chicago, including serving as a Board member of its Law Foundation.
665
Continuing the recent string of actions across the Biden administration in response to the July 2021 Executive Order on “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” on March 7, 2022, the US Treasury Department (Treasury) released a report titled “The State of Labor Market Competition,” and on (...)
187
The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently concluded in In re Lamictal Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litigation that a district court’s reliance on average prices to determine class-wide impact was insufficient. Instead, courts must conduct a rigorous analysis of the facts, evidence and (...)
582
The COVID-19 pandemic has placed additional stressors on labor markets, particularly for healthcare workers and essential employees. While recognizing that employers, recruiters and staffing agencies may need—and be allowed to—cooperate in unprecedented ways to address current needs, on April 13, (...)
178
The potential for government investigation increases during periods of rapid and extreme movement in price. The US Department of Justice (DOJ) recently reiterated its focus on prosecuting violations of antitrust laws, especially in areas affected by the coronavirus outbreak. On March 9, 2020, (...)
155
CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL ANNOUNCES HISTORIC $575 MILLION SETTLEMENT OF ANTITRUST SUIT AGAINST SUTTER HEALTH * California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (AG Becerra) announced on Friday, December 20, 2019, the terms of a comprehensive settlement agreement reached with Sutter Health (...)
199
A recent decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit is important for competitors involved in joint ventures because it states what mode of antitrust analysis—the per se rule or the rule of reason—applies to the conduct of joint ventures when it is challenged as anticompetitive. The (...)
163
THE LATEST: DOJ Announces Settlement with Carolinas Health System (Atrium Health) After Two Years of Litigation* The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced last week that it and the State of North Carolina have reached a settlement with Carolinas Healthcare System / Atrium Health relating to (...)
56
On October 20, 2016, the United States Department of Justice Antitrust Division (DOJ) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued joint Antitrust Guidance to Human Resource (HR) Professionals (the Guidance) involved in hiring and compensation decisions. The agencies issued the guidance to educate (...)
363
A recent New York state appeals court decision highlights the need for suppliers to continue exercising caution when adopting and implementing a resale price maintenance policy. On May 8, 2012, the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court affirmed a lower court’s decision that (...)
28
In a unanimous decision issued on May 24, 2010, the Supreme Court of the United States clarified when participants in a joint venture may face antitrust liability for their joint activities. In American Needle, Inc. v. National Football League, Inc., et al, the Supreme Court ruled that the (...)
270
New state law could affect implementation of minimum resale price maintenance programs. Suppliers should review their minimum resale price programs for their resellers in the United States following the passage of a new law in the State of Maryland prohibiting agreements that establish minimum (...)
203
District court case could affect implementation of minimum resale price maintenance programs. Sellers must still exercise great caution when designing minimum resale price programs for their resellers in the United States following the recently settled New York v. Herman Miller, Inc. case. (...)
19 avenue Jean Aicard
75011 Paris, France
106 West 32nd Street, Suite 149
New York, NY, 10001, USA
563 Chiswick High Road
W4 3AY London, UK