Insights

New York – June 20, 2025: Human Rights First honored Crowell & Moring counsel Rosa M. Morales with a Pro Bono Star Award in recognition of her “outstanding dedication and commitment to pro bono representation.”

New York – December 12, 2024: Glen McGorty, managing partner of Crowell & Moring’s New York office and member of the management board, and Rosa Morales, counsel in the firm’s Antitrust and Competition Group, have been named to Crain’s New York Business’ 2024 list of Notable Leaders in Accounting, Consulting, & Law. As reported by Crain’s, the 101 honorees on the list possess the financial, strategic, and legal experience “to drive significant commercial activity in the region, shaping New York City’s business landscape and fostering enterprise growth.”

New York – January 25, 2022: Crowell & Moring LLP is pleased to announce that Rosa M. Morales, counsel in the firm’s Antitrust & Competition Group, is the inaugural recipient of the Hollis Salzman Leadership Fellowship, established by the Antitrust Law Section of the New York State Bar Association (NYSBA) in memory of Hollis Salzman (1965-2020), a pre-eminent antitrust attorney and the Section’s longtime member and former leader. The Fellowship is designed to support and promote women antitrust lawyers who are in the mid-stage of their careers and seeking to move to the next level.

In a landmark verdict on April 14, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division notched its first-ever jury trial conviction for criminal wage-fixing under the Sherman Act in United States v. Eduardo Lopez in the District of Nevada. A home health care staffing executive, Eduardo (“Eddie”) Lopez, was found guilty of (1) conspiring with several competing home healthcare staffing agencies to fix the wages of home health nurses in the Las Vegas area, and (2) defrauding the unwitting buyer of his agency by concealing the then-ongoing antitrust investigation into nurse wage and hiring practices. It is worth noting, however, that while the Lopez conviction is a significant milestone for the DOJ’s campaign into labor antitrust violations, wage-fixing cases may be more straightforward to prosecute than no-poach agreements, where the DOJ still has not prevailed before a jury. This victory nonetheless affirms the DOJ’s ability to criminally prosecute labor market collusion as a criminal offense after numerous failed attempts, signaling the prudence of further caution for companies and individuals to mitigate risk in labor antitrust markets.

Four days before the change in administration and in the wake of several high-profile trial losses in cases involving alleged “no-poach” and wage-fixing agreements, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice, Antitrust Division (DOJ) jointly approved new guidelines, Antitrust Guidelines for Business Activities Affecting Workers” (the “2025 Guidelines” or “Guidelines”), that explain how antitrust enforcers have identified and assessed whether an agreement or business practice affecting workers may violate the antitrust laws.  The 2025 Guidelines were voted out at the FTC on a split 3-2 vote along party lines, with a brief but scathing dissenting statement from the Republican commissioners (including incoming FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson) that raises serious doubts as to how well the Guidelines reflect the approach the agencies will take during the next four years.  On the eve of the incoming Trump Administration, the 2025 Guidelines replaced the previous joint DOJ and FTC antitrust guidelines regarding employment practices that were issued in 2016, “Antitrust Guidance for Human Resource Professionals” (the “2016 Guidelines”), during the tail-end of the Obama Administration.

Plaintiffs battling the Federal Trade Commission’s ban on non-compete clauses in employment agreements notched a significant victory recently.  On August 20, 2024, U.S. District for the Northern District of Texas Judge Ada Brown permanently blocked the agency’s action in Ryan LLC v. Federal Trade Commission, concluding the rulemaking exceeded the agency’s statutory authority.  Judge Brown had previously granted a preliminary injunction that limited its effect to the plaintiffs in the case.  Yesterday’s ruling, however, which granted the plaintiffs’ summary judgment motion, permanently blocks the ban nationwide.