Peter Huston

Baker Botts (San Francisco)
Lawyer (Partner)

Peter Huston is a partner in Baker Botts’ Antitrust and Competition Practice with more than 25 years of experience handling high-stakes civil and criminal antitrust litigation, trials, government investigations and merger clearance work, both in and out of government. Mr. Huston has represented clients faced with civil and criminal antitrust and unfair competition exposure and has represented entities seeking agency approval for mergers and acquisitions. He has conducted internal investigations for major international corporations in cartel matters, worked on many complex antitrust cases and has significant defense-side trial experience. Mr. Huston also provides clients with antitrust advice on numerous subjects and helps them establish effective compliance programs tailored to their specific needs. Mr. Huston previously served as Assistant Chief in the San Francisco Office of the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice where he led and supervised both criminal cartel matters and civil merger matters. For his government service, Mr. Huston was awarded the Attorney General’s Distinguished Service Award and was twice awarded the Antitrust Division’s Award of Distinction. While at the Antitrust Division, Mr. Huston also served as head of the office’s civil program and investigated several proposed mergers. He was the lead trial counsel in United States v. Bazaarvoice, the government’s challenge to the consummated merger of the two leading providers of online rating and review software and services.

Distinctions

Linked authors

Baker Botts (Washington)
Baker Botts (Washington)
Baker Botts (Washington)
Baker Botts (Washington)

Articles

38 Bulletin

Peter Huston, Joseph Ostoyich, Scott Keller, Christopher Wilson The US Supreme Court increases the risk that online marketplaces with exclusive rights to third-party products will not have a defense under the “indirect purchaser” doctrine (Apple / Pepper)

16

On May 13, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a major antitrust decision in Apple v. Pepper, which could have far-reaching implications for retailers and platforms accused of monopolistic conduct. For example, the case increases the risk that any online marketplace with exclusive rights to (...)

Send a message