Law & Economics

[lawecon] 6/22 Term paper presentations

Class meeting time: 10 am

Important notes:

  • The order of presentations will be decided by drawing at the beginning on Thursday.
  • The reviewer is expected to examine the research questions, the assumptions (explicit or hidden), the analytical models of the paper, as well as the strength and weakness of its arguments. You’re the reviewer; be critical.
  • The reviewer should also look out for improper copy-pasting from other people’s works, inaccurate citations, and poor bluebooking jobs.
  • All are expected to read everyone else’s paper, in addition to the one you review. This is your last chance to shore up your participation score.
  • Learn to take good control of your time. Highlight your main arguments when time is short, and elaborate when time permits.
  • Each session lasts 1:20 or so. (see the time allocation table below).

Order of Presentations: to be decided via lottery on site.

Pairing (not the order of presentations) :

presenter reviewer
乃云 惠暄
惠暄 凱心
羽芯 宇哲
凱心 羽芯
宇哲 乃云

Time Allocation:

presentation 25 min.
review 10 min.
open discussion 15 min.
author’s final response 10 min.
moderator’s time 15 min.
Antitrust

[Antitrust] 1/15 Paper Presentations

Class meeting time: 9:00

Important notes:

  • The order of presentations will be decided by drawing when we meet.
  • The reviewer is expected to examine the research question, the assumptions, and the logical connections of the arguments, as well as checking the citations, among other things.
  • All are expected to read everyone else’s paper, in addition to the one you review. This is your last chance to shore up your participation score.
  • Learn to take good control of your time. Highlight your main arguments when time is short, and elaborate when time permits.
  • Each session lasts 1:30 or so. (see the time allocation table below).

Presenter-reviewer Pairing (but NOT the order of presentations):

presenter reviewer
凱心 宇哲
惠暄 羅嵐
羽芯 惠暄
宇哲 羽芯
乃云 凱心
羅嵐 乃云

Time Allocation:

presentation 30 min.
review 10 min.
open discussion 25 min.
author’s final response 10 min.
moderator’s time 15 min.
LRTW

[LRTW] Final AO presentations

Class meeting time:

  • 12:30 (Fri.): 11am
  • 1/9 (Mon.): 10am

Important notes:

  • As a presenter, you are expected to present your arguments anew, as in a conference; in other words, pretend we haven’t heard them before.
  • As a reviewer, you are expected to review the logical coherence of the arguments, the bluebooking of cited resources, and presentation performance.
  • All are expected to read everyone else’s AO, in addition to the one you review. This is your last chance to shore up your participation score.
  • Learn to take good control of your time (note the time is allocated differently from the other class). Highlight your main arguments when time is short, and elaborate when time permits.
  • Each session lasts roughly 1 hr. (see time allocation table below).

Order of Presentations: to be decided via lottery on site.

Pairing (not the order of presentations) :

presenter reviewer
12/30
之穎 子楠
子楠 羽芯
惠暄 宇哲
1/9
乃云 凱心
凱心 乃云
宇哲 惠暄
羽芯 之穎

Time Allocation:

presentation 20 min.
review 10 min.
open discussion 15 min.
author’s final response 5 min.
moderator’s time 10 min.
Antitrust

[Antitrust] 12/13 False Advertising

Mandatory:

  • POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co., 572 U.S. ___, 134 S. Ct. 2228 (2014).

Additional:

  • Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., 572 U.S. ___, 134 S. Ct. 1377 (2014).
  • Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 539 U.S. 23 (2003).
  • FTC, Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising, 16 CFR Part 255 (2009) and the 2010 Q&A.
  • FTC Advertising FAQ’s: A Guide for Small Business (PDF version).
  • Michael D. Scott, FTC, the Unfairness Doctrine, and Data Security Breach Litigation, 60 Admin. L. Rev. 127 (2008).
  • Thomas W. Edman, Note, Lies, Damn Lies, and Misleading Advertising: The Role of Consumer Surveys in the Wake of Mead Johnson v. Abbott Labs, 43 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 417 (2001).
  • Mead Johnson & Co. v. Abbott Laboratories, 201 F.3d 883 (7th Cir. 2000), opinion amended on denial of reh’g, 209 F.3d 1032 (7th Cir. 2000).
  • Avis Rent a Car Sys., Inc. v. Hertz Corp., 782 F.2d 381 (2d Cir. 1986).
Antitrust

[Antitrust] 11/29 Mergers & Acquisitions

Mandatory:

Additional:

  • DOJ Non-Horizontal Merger Guidelines.
  • German Federal Cartel Office, Guidance on Substantive Merger Control (2012).
  • United States v. General Dynamics, 415 U. S. 486 (1974).
  • FTC v. Procter & Gamble Co., 386 U.S. 568 (1967).
  • Brown Shoe v. United States, 370 U.S. 294 (1962).
  • FTC  v. Whole Foods Market, 548 F.3d 1028 (2008).
  • Omnicare, Inc. v. Unitedhealth Group, Inc., 629 F.3d 697 (7th Cir. 2011).