McDermott Will & Emery (Chicago)

Stephen Wu

McDermott Will & Emery (Chicago)
Lawyer (Partner)

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.

Linked authors

McDermott Will & Emery (Washington)
McDermott Will & Emery (Chicago)
McDermott Will & Emery (Chicago)
McDermott Will & Emery (Chicago)
McDermott Will & Emery (Washington)
McDermott Will & Emery (Chicago)
McDermott Will & Emery (Washington)
Crowell & Moring (Washington)

Articles

1698 Bulletin

Nicole L. Castle, Stefan M. Meisner, Stephen Wu The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit overturns a district court decision certifying a class of direct purchaser plaintiffs without undertaking a rigorous analysis in order to resolve factual disputes, assess competing evidence or weigh conflicting expert testimony (Lamictal)

74

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 (...)

Ashley Fischer, Stephen Wu The US DoJ and FTC issue a joint antitrust statement regarding COVID-19 and competition in labor markets and recognise that firms may need to cooperate in unprecedented ways to respond to the pandemic

501

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, (...)

Stephen Wu, Ashley Fischer The US DoJ reiterates its focus on prosecuting violations of antitrust laws in areas affected by the COVID-19 outbreak and the criminal prosecution that can be faced

116

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, (...)

Stephen Wu, Ashley Fischer, Jeffrey Brennan, Noah Feldman Greene The Californian Attorney General announces a $575 million settlement with the largest hospital system in Northern California (Sutter)

81

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 (...)

Stephen Wu, Jeffrey Brennan, Ashley Fischer, Ashley L. McMahon The US Court of Appeals for the sixth circuit establishes test for determining whether the conduct of joint ventures should be analysed under the rule of reason test (The Medical Center at Elizabeth Place / Atrium Health System)

125

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 (...)

Ashley Fischer, Ashley L. McMahon , Jeffrey Brennan, Michelle S. Lowery, Stephen Wu The US DoJ reaches a settlement with a healthcare system related to provisions in a contract between the health system and commercial insurers (Charlotte Mecklenburg Hospital Authority)

125

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 (...)

Joseph F. Winterscheid, Karne O. Newburn, Stephen Wu The New York Appellate Court rejects NY Attorney General’s challenge of alleged minimum resale price maintenance (RPM) scheme, holding that New York state statute does not render RPM agreements illegal per se and that restrictions that merely relate to minimum advertised prices do not constitute RPM agreements (Tempur-Pedic)

246

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 (...)

Joel G. Chefitz, Joseph F. Winterscheid, Stephen Wu The US State of Maryland rejects federal rule of reason standard established by US Supreme Court in Leegin, amending its state antitrust statute to make minimum resale price maintenance agreements per se illegal

237

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 (...)

Joel G. Chefitz, Joseph F. Winterscheid, Stephen Wu The New York District Court enters a consent decree in a case brought by Attorneys General of New York, Illinois and Michigan, requiring furniture manufacturer to terminate alleged minimum resale price maintenance program (Herman Miller)

166

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. (...)

Send a message