Baker Botts (Washington)

Joseph Ostoyich

Baker Botts (Washington)
Lawyer (Partner)

Joseph Ostoyich is Chair of the firm’s Litigation Department in Washington, D.C. He has more than two decades of experience representing some of the world’s leading companies in bet-the-company price fixing, monopolization and the full gamut of antitrust litigation in U.S. courts and in investigations in industries ranging from high-technology to paper, chemicals, foundry, energy, transportation and agricultural commodities.Mr. Ostoyich also represents parties in merger reviews by the Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission, the European Commission and government authorities around the world. In 2015, he is recognized as a leading antitrust lawyer in Chambers USA and Legal 500, rated “Preeminent” by Martindale-Hubbell, and named a D.C. Super Lawyer for Antitrust. The Legal 500, stated that Mr. Ostoyich “provides clients with a considerable pedigree in relation to a range of federal and state private antitrust litigation.” He is a member of the Antitrust Council of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and frequently speaks at industry conferences and client retreats about antitrust law developments. He has written and edited several dozen articles and analyses of the antitrust laws and co-authored a chapter on the law and economics of antitrust damages in a leading treatise. He is a former student of the University of Chicago Law School (J.D.) and of the Cornell University (B.A. with distinction).

Auteurs associés

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

Vidéos

Joseph Ostoyich (Baker Botts)
Joseph Ostoyich 17 septembre 2015 Bruxelles

Articles

428 Bulletin

Alex Bourelly, Heather Souder Choi, Joseph Ostoyich, Natalia Sorgente, Caroline Jones The US DoJ Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim confirms the opening of two dozen active grand jury investigations into potential criminal antitrust law violations

29

Clients that do business with the federal government should take note : despite the pandemic and the upcoming election, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) continues to prioritize its focus on punishing fraudulent and anticompetitive conduct by government contractors, carrying out dozens of (...)

Alex Bourelly, Anne Carpenter, Caroline Jones, Natalia Sorgente, Heather Souder Choi, Joseph Ostoyich The US DoJ confirms it has opened multiple new criminal investigations with its Procurement Collusion Strike Force

63

A senior official at the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) recently confirmed that the Antitrust Division has opened multiple grand jury investigations in connection with the Procurement Collusion Strike Force (“Strike Force”) formed in November of last year. Speaking at a conference on February (...)

Alex Bourelly, Joseph Ostoyich, Heather Souder Choi, Caroline Jones The US DoJ indicts a third individual for bid-rigging in online auctions for surplus government equipment (GSA Auctions / Alan Gaines)

55

On February 5, 2020, the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced the indictment of a Missouri man – the third individual to be charged – for participation in a conspiracy to rig bids submitted to the General Services Administration (“GSA”) at online auctions for (...)

Heather Souder Choi, Joseph Ostoyich, Caroline Jones The US DoJ forms new criminal antitrust “strike force” focused on investigating price fixing and bid rigging for government contracts

158

On November 5, 2019, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced the creation of a new “strike force” designed to combat criminal antitrust violations in the government procurement process. The newly-formed Procurement Collusion Strike Force (“PCSF”) will include prosecutors from DOJ’s (...)

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)

35

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 (...)

Nathan Chubb, John M. Taladay, Stephen Weissman, Joseph Ostoyich The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit rejects antitrust claims predicated on a supplier’s market-share discount program and other promotional tactics (Eisai / Sanofi)

31

On May 4, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit announced its decision in Eisai, Inc. v. Sanofi Aventis U.S., LLC, rejecting antitrust claims predicated on a supplier’s market-share discount program and other promotional tactics. While the court’s decision adds some definition to (...)

John M. Taladay, Joseph Ostoyich The US White House publishes an executive order to further promote competitive conditions and root out antitrust abuses in industries across the American economy

25

Last week, President Obama issued an Executive Order ostensibly designed to further promote competitive conditions and root out antitrust abuses in industries across the American economy, including the healthcare, energy, and broadband industries which were specifically identified in the (...)

Envoyer un message