On December 11, 2025, NASCAR settled an ongoing and closely watched antitrust trial brought by two racing teams, 23XI Racing (co-owned by Michael Jordan) and Front Row Motorsports, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina. The settlement was announced after the plaintiffs had presented their case-in-chief and following testimony from several high-profile witnesses, including Jordan. The financial terms of the settlement have not been publicly disclosed, but the agreement aims to provide a more equitable business framework for teams in the sport.
FTC Fails to Establish That Social Media Company Has Monopoly Power
On November 18, 2025, after five years of litigation, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia entered judgment in favor of Meta and against the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in its lawsuit alleging that Meta held and illegally maintained monopoly power in personal social networking through its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp. The decision followed a six-week bench trial that included testimony from high-ranking Meta executives, including Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg.
State AGs Move to Intervene in Federal Oversight of DOJ’s $14 Billion Merger Agreement
On October 14, 2025, a coalition of 13 state attorneys general, including those from California, New York, Massachusetts and Illinois, filed a motion seeking to intervene in the Tunney Act review by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California of the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) settlement that allowed the $14 billion merger between Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) and Juniper Networks to proceed.
Read the full Alert on the Duane Morris website.
FTC Abandons Appeals of Decisions Striking Down Its Noncompete Rule, but Restrictive Covenants Remain an Enforcement Priority
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has formally abandoned its appeals in Ryan, LLC v. FTC (5th Cir.) and Properties of the Villages v. FTC (11th Cir.), effectively conceding the vacatur of its proposed nationwide ban on noncompete agreements. While this decision confirms that the FTC’s sweeping noncompete rule will not take effect, employers should not interpret the move as a retreat from scrutiny of post-employment restrictive covenants. On the contrary, recent enforcement actions and policy initiatives suggest that the FTC will continue to pursue noncompetes and similar labor market restrictive covenants through alternative strategies. Read the full Alert on the Duane Morris website.
Chambers USA Recognizes Duane Morris Antitrust Division and Attorneys
Duane Morris LLP is pleased to announced that Chambers USA has recognized Duane Morris Antitrust division and attorneys.
Pennsylvania
Edward G. Biester III, Antitrust
Sean P. McConnell, Antitrust
Washington, D.C.
Brian H. Pandya, Antitrust
Large No-Poach Class Settlement Gets Preliminary Approval in District of Connecticut
A putative class of aerospace workers recently obtained preliminary approval of large settlements with several government contracting firms in antitrust litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut. The nine named plaintiffs are current and former employees of Pratt & Whitney, which is now a division of RTX Corp. (formerly Raytheon Technologies Corporation). Pratt & Whitney manufactures jet engines for commercial and military aircraft. The other five defendants are suppliers of engineering services to Pratt & Whitney.
In their class action complaint, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendants conspired to restrict the recruitment and hiring of each other’s employees in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1. Such agreements are commonly referred to as no-poach agreements. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that there were three types of illegal no-poach agreements: (1) an agreement between Pratt & Whitney and the engineering services firm defendants not to recruit or hire each other’s employees, which Pratt & Whitney primarily enforced; (2) an agreement that Pratt & Whitney would not hire from the engineering services firms without their prior written approval; and (3) additional bilateral agreements between certain firms and Pratt & Whitney limiting Pratt & Whitney’s ability to recruit and hire employees from that firm. Plaintiffs argued that this conspiracy restrained competition in the labor market for aerospace workers and suppressed employees’ compensation.
In order to obtain dismissal of the case with prejudice and an exchange of releases, Pratt & Whitney has agreed to pay $34 million into a settlement fund for the benefit of the class. Similarly, the engineering services firm defendants have agreed to pay $26.5 million into a similar fund. A hearing has been set for May 7, 2025 to determine final approval of the settlement after any objections or opt-outs from class members.
Federal Court Stops the FTC Noncompete Rule from Being Enforced or Taking Effect
On August 20, 2024, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, in the Ryan lawsuit, struck down a final Federal Trade Commission (FTC) rule―which was set to go into effect on September 4, 2024, and ban noncompetition agreements for virtually all U.S. workers―holding that the rule shall not be enforced by the FTC or take effect as to any workers or employers. Read the full Alert on the Duane Morris website.
FTC Votes to Ban Non-Compete Agreements
On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) voted 3-2 to approve a final rule banning non-competes with all workers 120 days after publication in the Federal Register, and invalidating existing non-competes with all workers except senior executives. Although the final rule abandons many aspects of the rule proposed in January 2023, the final rule represents a sea change in the law relating to non-compete clauses in the United States. Read the full Alert on the Duane Morris website.
FTC to Vote April 23 on Rule to Ban Noncompete Agreements
The Federal Trade Commission will vote at an open commission meeting to be held virtually on Tuesday, April 23, 2024, at 2:00 p.m. Eastern on its proposed rule banning employers from entering into noncompete agreements with workers. If issued, the final rule would go into effect 60 days following its publication in the Federal Register, and companies would have to be in compliance 180 days after publication. Read more on Duane Morris’ website.
SCOTUS Declines to Review Antitrust ATM Fee Dispute
On April 15, 2024, in Visa Inc., et al., v. National ATM Council, Inc., et al., No. 23-814 (Apr. 15, 2024), the U.S. Supreme Court declined a petition for review submitted by Visa Inc. (“Visa”) and Mastercard Inc. (“Mastercard”) urging the Supreme Court to resolve a circuit split over the correct standard of review courts should use when evaluating motions for class certification. Mastercard and Visa argued that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit erred by only requiring plaintiffs to show that questions common to the class predominate and allowing the fact finder to later address issues related to uninjured class members. The Supreme Court denied the petition for review.
The D.C. Circuit’s ruling in Visa v. National ATM Council is required reading for any corporate counsel handling antitrust class actions involving price-fixing allegations and underscores the importance of the standard of review used by courts when considering class certification. Read the full post on the Duane Morris Class Action Defense Blog.