1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |DOJ Issues Merger Process Reforms

DOJ Issues Merger Process Reforms

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.18.06

The Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice recently announced a series of important reforms to its merger review process. These reforms are designed to improve the efficiency of the Division's investigations, and to reduce both the cost and time required to complete merger investigations in which a "Second Request" has been issued pursuant to the Hart-Scott-Rodino ("HSR") Antitrust Improvements Act.

At the core of the DOJ's issued reforms is a voluntary option through which companies may be able to significantly reduce the burden of complying with a Second Request. In exchange for the parties' agreement to certain timing and other procedural agreements, the Division announced that it will limit the scope of a Second Request to require only the production of responsive materials from a firm's central files and a targeted list of no more than 30 employees. The Division also announced a change in its Model Second Request, reducing the default search period from between three to four years to two years prior to the date of the request's issuance. These reforms recognize that explosive growth in the amount of electronic data stored by firms has substantially increased the volume of material potentially responsive to a Second Request, and are intended to provide a mechanism to reduce the burden of production. These reforms are largely similar to those issued earlier by the Federal Trade Commission, although they provide a more flexible mechanism with respect to the length of the second waiting period following the parties' certification of compliance with the Second Request.

In addition to these changes, the Division also announced that it will seek greater participation by the parties to a transaction during the initial 15-or 30-day waiting period. Through more substantive consultation, including the issuance of voluntary information requests and interviews with corporate representatives, this initiative is intended to further facilitate a more efficient and effective merger review process.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25

Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality

On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument....

View All Insights