Lisa A. Peterson

Lisa A. Peterson focuses her practice on antitrust, regulatory and litigation matters. She assists clients across a variety of industries and has represented numerous clients in the health care, pharmaceutical, and biotechnology industries. Lisa advises clients on mergers and acquisitions, including obtaining clearance from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DOJ), as well as counsels clients on issues regarding antitrust compliance, pricing, and distribution. She also counsels clients on cartel prosecutions and defenses, including government investigations and the initiation and defense of civil class action litigation. Read Lisa Peterson's full bio.

Firm/Organization: McDermott Will & Emery

Blogs: Antitrust Alert

Latest Articles

Antitrust Alert

Antitrust Enforcement Update: Spotlight on Physician Transactions

By Jeffrey W. Brennan, Ashley Fischer, Katharine M. O'Connor, Stephen Wu & Lisa A. Peterson on June 21, 2019

At both the state and federal level, antitrust enforcement agencies continue to pursue successful challenges to physician practice transactions. This article summarizes two recent enforcement actions, as well as a new state law that requires prior notice of healthcare provider transactions. We also offer practical takeaways for providers pursuing practice acquisitions. Access the full article.…

Antitrust Alert

Texas Court Declares Licensing Offer Based on End Device Is FRAND, Diverges from California Court in Qualcomm

By Stefan M. Meisner, Anthony S. Ferrara & Lisa A. Peterson on June 3, 2019

Standard-essential patent holders and implementers may face uncertainty regarding licensing practices following a May 23 Texas court ruling. In the ruling, a Texas federal judge reached a conclusion different from a recent California court decision—FTC v. Qualcomm—on the question of whether an SEP holder must base its royalty rates on the “smallest salable patent-practicing unit” in order to comply with a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory royalty commitment. Access the full article.…

Antitrust Alert

Federal Judge Finds Qualcomm Violated the FTC Act Through Monopolistic and Exclusionary Conduct

By Stefan M. Meisner, Lisa A. Peterson & Anthony S. Ferrara on May 23, 2019

On May 21, a California federal judge ruled in favor of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in its suit against Qualcomm in a much-anticipated decision, concluding that Qualcomm violated the FTC Act by maintaining its monopoly position as a modem chip supplier through a number of exclusionary practices, including refusing to license standard essential patents (SEPs) on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. Qualcomm likely will appeal the decision to the US Court of Appeals…

Antitrust Alert

Out of Bounds: Sports Agencies Flagged for Anticompetitive Bidding Agreements

By Jon B. Dubrow & Lisa A. Peterson on February 27, 2019

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) recently sued former joint venture partners because they allegedly coordinated their competitive activities beyond the legitimate scope of their venture. This case illustrates several important points. First, companies who collaborate through joint ventures and similar arrangements need to be mindful that any legitimate collaborative activity does not “spill over” to restrain competition in other unrelated areas. Second, DOJ discovered the conduct during its review of documents produced in connection…

Antitrust Alert

Federal Jury Finds that Ericsson’s Licensing Offer to HTC is FRAND

By Stefan M. Meisner, Anthony S. Ferrara & Lisa A. Peterson on February 25, 2019

On February 15, a Texas federal jury found that Ericsson did not breach its obligation to offer HTC licenses to its standard-essential patents (SEPs) on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. The verdict ended a nearly two-year dispute as to whether FRAND obligations preclude a licensing offer based on end products rather than components. Ericsson succeeded in convincing the jury that its FRAND commitment does not require it to base royalty rates for its SEPs…

Antitrust Alert

District Court: IPR Policy Does Not Automatically Require License Fees Based on Components

By Stefan M. Meisner, Lisa A. Peterson & Anthony S. Ferrara on February 12, 2019

The US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas ruled that for the purposes of honoring a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) commitment, a pool member is not required to base royalties for its standard essential patents (SEPs) on the value of components. HTC America Inc. et al. v. Ericsson Inc., Case No. 6:18-cv-00243-JRG (E.D. Tex. Jan. 7, 2019) (Gilstrap, J). According to the court, Ericsson’s commitment to the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI)…

Antitrust Alert

FTC Secures Partial Victory Requiring SEP Holder to License to All Comers in Antitrust Case

By Stefan M. Meisner & Lisa A. Peterson on November 14, 2018

Recently, a federal district court in California granted partial summary judgment for the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in an important intellectual property and antitrust case involving standard essential patents (SEP). The court’s decision requires an SEP holder to license its SEPs for cellular communication standards to all applicants willing to pay a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) rate, regardless of whether the applicant supplies components or end-devices. The decision represents a significant victory for…

Antitrust Alert

THE LATEST: Just Because Your Deal Cleared Doesn’t Mean You’re in the Clear

By Gregory E. Heltzer & Lisa A. Peterson on March 13, 2018

Dealmakers know that a critical part of the merger process is obtaining antitrust clearance from government enforcers. But, even if the antitrust enforcers review and clear a transaction, a third-party can file a private suit alleging the transaction violated the antitrust laws. Recently, an aggrieved customer did just that—it won a substantial jury verdict and is also seeking a court order to unwind the transaction nearly six years after the transaction was announced. WHAT HAPPENED…

Antitrust Alert

Optical Illusion: Lack of Overcharge Evidence Yields Summary Judgment Victory for Optical Disk Drive Manufacturers

By David L. Hanselman, Jr., Stefan M. Meisner, Stephen Wu & Lisa A. Peterson on December 29, 2017

Manufacturers of optical disk drives defeated electronics companies’, retailers’ and indirect purchaser plaintiffs’ conspiracy claims after seven years of litigation. On December 18, 2017, the US District Court for the Northern District of California issued simultaneous orders that granted summary judgment in favor of defendants after finding that the electronics companies, retailers and indirect purchasers failed to demonstrate evidence of injury and causation. Continue Reading.…

Antitrust Alert

Jury Gives Auto Parts Manufacturer a Pass on DOJ Conspiracy Claims

By Stefan M. Meisner, Lisa A. Peterson, Mary Strimel & Paul M. Thompson on December 12, 2017

On November 29, 2017, a Japanese auto parts manufacturer and its US subsidiary defeated the US Department of Justice’s claims that the companies conspired with others to fix prices and rig bids for automotive body sealing products. The case involved a rare trial involving criminal antitrust charges. After 13 days of trial, a jury returned a not-guilty verdict for Tokai Kogyo Co. Ltd. and its subsidiary, Green Tokai Co. Ltd. Continue Reading.…

Lisa A. Peterson

Antitrust Enforcement Update: Spotlight on Physician Transactions

Texas Court Declares Licensing Offer Based on End Device Is FRAND, Diverges from California Court in Qualcomm

Federal Judge Finds Qualcomm Violated the FTC Act Through Monopolistic and Exclusionary Conduct

Out of Bounds: Sports Agencies Flagged for Anticompetitive Bidding Agreements

Federal Jury Finds that Ericsson’s Licensing Offer to HTC is FRAND

District Court: IPR Policy Does Not Automatically Require License Fees Based on Components

FTC Secures Partial Victory Requiring SEP Holder to License to All Comers in Antitrust Case

THE LATEST: Just Because Your Deal Cleared Doesn’t Mean You’re in the Clear

Optical Illusion: Lack of Overcharge Evidence Yields Summary Judgment Victory for Optical Disk Drive Manufacturers

Jury Gives Auto Parts Manufacturer a Pass on DOJ Conspiracy Claims

Company

Support

New to the Network