 |
|
|
Antitrust Law & Litigation
Agenda 
|
|
Day One: Thursday, Nov 20
|
| Time |
Session |
Panelists |
|
08:00-08:30
|
|
Continental Breakfast
Guests welcome.
|
|
|
|
08:30-08:45
|
|
Overview of Program
|
|
Braman,
Shulman, D.
|
|
08:45-10:15
|
|
Proof of Conspiracy: A survey of the state of the law pre-Fructose, including tacit and express agreements, direct and circumstantial evidence, and proof that tends to exclude the possibility of independent action
|
|
Alioto,
Arquit,
Baker, T.,
Shulman, D.
|
|
10:15-10:30
|
|
Morning Break
|
|
|
|
10:30-12:00
|
|
Fructose and the Economic Debate: The meaning and importance of Judge Posner's decision in Fructose, and the economic debate between Turner and Posner on whether parallel conduct can constitute an agreement in a concentrated market
|
|
Baker, T.,
Comanor,
Shapiro
|
|
12:00-01:15
|
|
Lunch
Provided
|
|
|
|
01:30-03:00
|
|
When is Summary Judgment on Conspiracy Appropriate?: Standards, plausibility, economic evidence, game theory, plus factors, experts, and how they affect sufficiency of evidence
|
|
Balto,
Doyle,
Hubbard,
Peterson
|
|
03:00-03:15
|
|
Afternoon Break
|
|
|
|
03:15-05:00
|
|
Proving a Conspiracy at Trial: What type of evidence is persuasive to a trier of fact, and how should it be presented
|
|
Brown,
Croce,
Koob,
Skubel,
Judge Walker
|
|
05:30-07:15
|
|
Champagne and hors d’oeuvres Reception with Faculty
Guests welcome.
|
|
|
| |
|
Day Two: Friday, Nov 21
|
| Time |
Session |
Panelists |
|
07:30-08:00
|
|
Continental Breakfast
Guests welcome.
|
|
|
|
08:00-08:15
|
|
Overview of Today's Session
|
|
Braman,
Shulman, D.
|
|
08:15-10:00
|
|
Consumer Harm: What is it, and how is it proved?
|
|
Arquit,
Brown,
Comanor,
Hubbard
|
|
10:00-10:15
|
|
Morning Break
|
|
|
|
10:15-12:15
|
|
Consumer Harm and Specific Violations: Which antitrust violations require proof of consumer harm, including Section 1 per se, Section 1 rule of reason, and Section 2; and what is the intersection of consumer harm and antitrust injury?
|
|
Balto,
Doyle,
Koob,
Shulman, D.,
Skubel
|
|
11:45-12:15
|
|
Lunch
|
|
|
|
12:15-01:00
|
|
Effective Trial of an Antitrust Case
Provided
|
|
Judge Walker
|
|
01:15-02:30
|
|
Presenting Evidence of Consumer Harm at Trial: How is evidence of consumer harm effectively presented to a trier of fact
|
|
Arquit,
Brown,
Croce,
Koob,
Peterson
|
|
02:30-02:40
|
|
Conference Wrap-Up
|
|
Braman,
Shulman, D.
|
| |
|
Panelists
|
|
Chair
|
Robert W.
Doyle, Jr.
Sheppard Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP, Washington, D.C.
|
Daniel R.
Shulman
Gray Plant Mooty, Minneapolis, MN
|
| |
|
Faculty
|
Joseph M.
Alioto
Alioto Law Firm, San Francisco, CA
|
Kevin J.
Arquit
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, New York City, NY
|
Tyler A.
Baker
Fenwick & West, Mountain View, CA
|
David A.
Balto
David A. Balto, Esq., Washington, DC
|
Kent
Brown
Networks & Technology Section, Antitrust Division, U.S. DOJ, Washington, DC
|
Professor
William
Comanor
Comanor & Smiley, Los Angeles, CA
|
Nick
Croce
DOAR Communications, Lynbrook, NY
|
Robert L.
Hubbard
New York Attorney General's Office, New York, NY
|
Charles E.
Koob
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, New York City, NY
|
Carol
Peterson
3M Office of the General Counsel, St. Paul, MN
|
Carl
Shapiro
Charles River Associates, Oakland, CA
|
Marimichael O.
Skubel
Kirkland & Ellis, Washington, DC
|
The Hon.
Vaughn R.
Walker
U.S. District Court, San Francisco, CA
|
| |
|
|
|
