Previous business/academic article Next business/academic article
Business Articles Awards > Mergers

Becoming a Third-Party Witness When Competitors or Suppliers Merge

Steven J. Cernak, Today’s General counsel, APR/MAY 2017, Volume 14/Number 2

See Steven J. Cernak's resume

Vote for this articleHelp

* Average
** Interesting
*** Good
**** Excellent
***** Must receive an Award!

Please note that the star(s) appearing on the article page before you have voted reflect the status of all votes registered to date.

Readers’ vote will close on February 9, 2018. Readers’ vote will allow you to nominate 1 article for each of the Awards, i.e., 10 Academic articles, 10 Business articles, and the best Soft Laws. The readers’ short-list of Academic and Business Articles will be communicated to the Board together with the 20 articles nominated by the Steering Committees. The Board will decide on the award-winning articles. Results will be announced at the Awards ceremony to take place in Washington DC on the eve of the ABA Antitrust Spring Meeting on April 10, 2018.

Click here to read the full article online

To determine if a merger is good or bad for competition, the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice Antitrust Division need information about the merging parties and the relevant industries. That information comes through a Hart Scott Rodino Act (HSR) filing. Throughout this process, the reviewing agency will reach out to third parties – customers or competitors – for relevant information, usually via a voluntary phone interview with a knowledgeable executive.

Companies preparing to respond to enforcement requests for information should begin by answering three basic questions: Are we the witness the government really wants? Do we have the type of evidence the government wants to hear? And are we prepared to go wherever these inquiries lead?

Download our brochure