by Christopher A. Miller and Nicole Jefferson
Left to proper: Christopher A. Miller and Nicole Jefferson (pictures courtesy of Miller Shah LLP)
On April 14, 2025, the Division of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division (“The Division”) secured its first wage-fixing prison conviction in United States v. Lopez, after a federal jury discovered that Eduardo “Eddie” Lopez violated Part 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act (“Part 1”) by participating in wire fraud and wage fixing. This resolution signifies a shift within the DOJ’s strategy to antitrust conduct within the labor market towards an growth of prison enforcement and deviates from nearly all of antitrust litigation, which has largely been civilly prosecuted.
Traditionally, the DOJ has had restricted success in criminally prosecuting antitrust misconduct within the labor market, with a number of instances being dismissed at trial attributable to failure to fulfill evidentiary burden. The DOJ has had higher problem securing prison convictions for no-poach agreements in comparison with wage-fixing agreements on account of jury reluctance to pursue prison prosecution. Since 2020, the Division has introduced 30 defendants to trial for Part 1 violations, leading to just one conviction. In January 2021, the Division filed its first prison motion towards Surgical Care Associates, LLC (SCA) and SCAI Holdings, LLC for Part 1 violations, alleging that SCA and SCAI holdings conspired with opponents to not solicit one another’s senior stage workers. The Division voluntarily dismissed the indictment with out a clear authorized motive for doing so, as an alternative stating within the submitting of the movement that the dismissal would enable for “the conservation of the Courtroom’s time and sources.” The dismissal occurred amid a sequence of challenges with bringing no-poach and wage-fixing prison instances. Current no-poaching and wage-fixing instances introduced by the Division have resulted in acquittals together with United States v. Patel (2023), United States v. Jindal (2022), and United States v. DaVita, Inc. (2022). In Jindal, defendants filed a movement to dismiss, asserting that wage-fixing shouldn’t be prosecuted criminally as a result of it lacked a transparent authorized precedent, however the Courtroom denied the movement and held that wage-fixing is a “per se” violation of Part 1. Though the defendants have been acquitted in Patel, Jindal, and DaVita, the Decide’s denial of their motions to dismiss indictments signifies the Courtroom’s acknowledgement of the “per se” violation warranting prison prosecution.
In March 2023, Mr. Lopez was indicted with wire fraud and wage fixing, in violation of Part 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Mr. Lopez was accused of capping wages of dwelling healthcare nurses at his firm, Neighborhood Well being, in Las Vegas, Nevada between March 2016 and Could 2019, leading to vital misplaced wages. In September 2023, a federal grand jury returned a superseding indictment, charging Lopez with 5 further counts of wire fraud, alleging that through the FBI Investigation, Lopez offered the house healthcare staffing firm for over $10 million with out disclosing the federal investigation to the client. The 2-week jury trial led to a unanimous verdict, convicting Lopez of 1 depend of wage-fixing conspiracy and 5 counts of wire fraud.
The choice comes after the DOJ and Federal Commerce Fee (FTC), (collectively, “The Companies”) launched up to date Antitrust Steerage in January 2025, changing the 2016 Steerage. The objective of the brand new steerage was to strengthen their dedication to prosecuting antitrust labor market misconduct criminally. The 2016 Steerage explains that wage-fixing and no-poach agreements “get rid of competitors in the identical irredeemable method as agreements to repair product costs or allocate prospects, which have historically been criminally investigated and prosecuted as hardcore cartel conduct. Accordingly, the DOJ will criminally examine allegations that employers have agreed amongst themselves on worker compensation or to not solicit or rent every others’ workers.” The 2016 steerage additionally explains that no-poach and wage fixing agreements are “per se unlawful”, that means that the settlement is against the law no matter whether or not the bigger collaboration is legit. The 2025 Steerage reiterates this level, stating “some kinds of agreements, together with wage-fixing and no-poach agreements, might violate antitrust legal guidelines and may result in prison expenses.” Their objective is to supply a stronger deterrence to companies from participating in wage-fixing by doubling down on these harsher penalties and to make sure compliance.
Previous to the 2025 Tips replace, the Division launched a handbook for regulation enforcement in 2023 that features an outline of federal antitrust crimes. It displays an analogous dedication to elevated penalties, jail time, and prison fines because the language within the 2016 Tips. The handbook explains that “as a result of prison antitrust conspiracies are inherently anticompetitive, the settlement to repair costs, rig bids, or allocate markets is the crime. In a case alleging a price-fixing, bid-rigging, or market allocation settlement, it isn’t a protection that the challenged conduct was essential to keep away from cutthroat competitors, that it really stimulated competitors, or that it resulted in cheap costs.”
Whereas antitrust violations have been addressed by means of civil litigation, a shift to prison proceedings suggests extra extreme penalties. United States v. Lopez units a precedent for wage-fixing prison convictions. There’s concern, nevertheless, amongst authorized professionals that prison prosecutions are pointless, and so they consider civil antitrust proceedings are ample to handle Part 1 violations. Different students declare that civil prosecution doesn’t maintain the identical deterring impact of prison prosecutions. It stays that prison prosecutions for wage-fixing and no-poach agreements appear to be more and more probably underneath the revised 2025 Antitrust Steerage.
Christopher A. Miller is an Affiliate and Nicole Jefferson is a Venture Analyst at Miller Shah LLP.
The views, opinions and positions expressed inside all posts are these of the creator(s) alone and don’t symbolize these of the Program on Company Compliance and Enforcement (PCCE) or of the New York College Faculty of Regulation. PCCE makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness and validity or any statements made on this website and won’t be liable any errors, omissions or representations. The copyright of this content material belongs to the creator(s) and any legal responsibility as regards to infringement of mental property rights stays with the creator(s).
by Christopher A. Miller and Nicole Jefferson
Left to proper: Christopher A. Miller and Nicole Jefferson (pictures courtesy of Miller Shah LLP)
On April 14, 2025, the Division of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division (“The Division”) secured its first wage-fixing prison conviction in United States v. Lopez, after a federal jury discovered that Eduardo “Eddie” Lopez violated Part 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act (“Part 1”) by participating in wire fraud and wage fixing. This resolution signifies a shift within the DOJ’s strategy to antitrust conduct within the labor market towards an growth of prison enforcement and deviates from nearly all of antitrust litigation, which has largely been civilly prosecuted.
Traditionally, the DOJ has had restricted success in criminally prosecuting antitrust misconduct within the labor market, with a number of instances being dismissed at trial attributable to failure to fulfill evidentiary burden. The DOJ has had higher problem securing prison convictions for no-poach agreements in comparison with wage-fixing agreements on account of jury reluctance to pursue prison prosecution. Since 2020, the Division has introduced 30 defendants to trial for Part 1 violations, leading to just one conviction. In January 2021, the Division filed its first prison motion towards Surgical Care Associates, LLC (SCA) and SCAI Holdings, LLC for Part 1 violations, alleging that SCA and SCAI holdings conspired with opponents to not solicit one another’s senior stage workers. The Division voluntarily dismissed the indictment with out a clear authorized motive for doing so, as an alternative stating within the submitting of the movement that the dismissal would enable for “the conservation of the Courtroom’s time and sources.” The dismissal occurred amid a sequence of challenges with bringing no-poach and wage-fixing prison instances. Current no-poaching and wage-fixing instances introduced by the Division have resulted in acquittals together with United States v. Patel (2023), United States v. Jindal (2022), and United States v. DaVita, Inc. (2022). In Jindal, defendants filed a movement to dismiss, asserting that wage-fixing shouldn’t be prosecuted criminally as a result of it lacked a transparent authorized precedent, however the Courtroom denied the movement and held that wage-fixing is a “per se” violation of Part 1. Though the defendants have been acquitted in Patel, Jindal, and DaVita, the Decide’s denial of their motions to dismiss indictments signifies the Courtroom’s acknowledgement of the “per se” violation warranting prison prosecution.
In March 2023, Mr. Lopez was indicted with wire fraud and wage fixing, in violation of Part 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Mr. Lopez was accused of capping wages of dwelling healthcare nurses at his firm, Neighborhood Well being, in Las Vegas, Nevada between March 2016 and Could 2019, leading to vital misplaced wages. In September 2023, a federal grand jury returned a superseding indictment, charging Lopez with 5 further counts of wire fraud, alleging that through the FBI Investigation, Lopez offered the house healthcare staffing firm for over $10 million with out disclosing the federal investigation to the client. The 2-week jury trial led to a unanimous verdict, convicting Lopez of 1 depend of wage-fixing conspiracy and 5 counts of wire fraud.
The choice comes after the DOJ and Federal Commerce Fee (FTC), (collectively, “The Companies”) launched up to date Antitrust Steerage in January 2025, changing the 2016 Steerage. The objective of the brand new steerage was to strengthen their dedication to prosecuting antitrust labor market misconduct criminally. The 2016 Steerage explains that wage-fixing and no-poach agreements “get rid of competitors in the identical irredeemable method as agreements to repair product costs or allocate prospects, which have historically been criminally investigated and prosecuted as hardcore cartel conduct. Accordingly, the DOJ will criminally examine allegations that employers have agreed amongst themselves on worker compensation or to not solicit or rent every others’ workers.” The 2016 steerage additionally explains that no-poach and wage fixing agreements are “per se unlawful”, that means that the settlement is against the law no matter whether or not the bigger collaboration is legit. The 2025 Steerage reiterates this level, stating “some kinds of agreements, together with wage-fixing and no-poach agreements, might violate antitrust legal guidelines and may result in prison expenses.” Their objective is to supply a stronger deterrence to companies from participating in wage-fixing by doubling down on these harsher penalties and to make sure compliance.
Previous to the 2025 Tips replace, the Division launched a handbook for regulation enforcement in 2023 that features an outline of federal antitrust crimes. It displays an analogous dedication to elevated penalties, jail time, and prison fines because the language within the 2016 Tips. The handbook explains that “as a result of prison antitrust conspiracies are inherently anticompetitive, the settlement to repair costs, rig bids, or allocate markets is the crime. In a case alleging a price-fixing, bid-rigging, or market allocation settlement, it isn’t a protection that the challenged conduct was essential to keep away from cutthroat competitors, that it really stimulated competitors, or that it resulted in cheap costs.”
Whereas antitrust violations have been addressed by means of civil litigation, a shift to prison proceedings suggests extra extreme penalties. United States v. Lopez units a precedent for wage-fixing prison convictions. There’s concern, nevertheless, amongst authorized professionals that prison prosecutions are pointless, and so they consider civil antitrust proceedings are ample to handle Part 1 violations. Different students declare that civil prosecution doesn’t maintain the identical deterring impact of prison prosecutions. It stays that prison prosecutions for wage-fixing and no-poach agreements appear to be more and more probably underneath the revised 2025 Antitrust Steerage.
Christopher A. Miller is an Affiliate and Nicole Jefferson is a Venture Analyst at Miller Shah LLP.
The views, opinions and positions expressed inside all posts are these of the creator(s) alone and don’t symbolize these of the Program on Company Compliance and Enforcement (PCCE) or of the New York College Faculty of Regulation. PCCE makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness and validity or any statements made on this website and won’t be liable any errors, omissions or representations. The copyright of this content material belongs to the creator(s) and any legal responsibility as regards to infringement of mental property rights stays with the creator(s).
