Shane Yodlowski
Overview
Shane Yodlowski has experience counseling clients on product safety and risk mitigation strategy, defending companies in nationwide multidistrict litigations, and representing clients before the Department of Justice, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Federal Trade Commission, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Some of his clients include manufacturers and distributors of home appliances, recreational vehicles, infant safety products, and consumer electronics. Shane maintains an active pro bono practice, focusing his representation on wrongful convictions and, separately, the needs of children and families. He is also a member of the District of Columbia Bar.
Career & Education
- University of Central Florida, B.A., cum laude, 2014
- The George Washington University Law School, J.D., 2019
- District of Columbia
Shane's Insights
Client Alert | 7 min read | 08.22.23
FTC Pushes Enforcement Frontier Against Board Interlocks and Information Sharing Among Competitors
The Federal Trade Commission took a major step recently to crack down on unlawful interlocking directorates and leverage its “standalone” authority that prohibits “unfair methods of competition.” In a complaint and consent order issued last week, the FTC alleged that a transaction between EQT Corporation and QEP Partners, LP (Quantum) violated Section 8 of the Clayton Act, the first time in 40 years that the agency has enforced the statute. The FTC also alleged that the transaction and an existing joint venture independently violated Section 5 of the FTC Act based largely on the prospective ability to share competitively sensitive information, an expansive theory of harm. The consent order goes well beyond the typical remedy for a Section 8 violation – prohibiting the interlock – and also prohibits Quantum from serving on certain other competitors’ boards without prior approval of the Commission. The Section 5 information sharing remedy is similarly aggressive, requiring the parties to dissolve an existing “cozy” joint-venture and requiring Quantum to divest all EQT shares it acquired in the underlying transaction. These novel theories of harm and aggressive remedies are a warning shot to companies that the agencies are ramping up scrutiny of board interlocks and competitor information exchanges.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 07.20.23
Turning Back The Clock? Agencies Seek to Remake and Expand Merger Prohibitions
Client Alert | 5 min read | 11.12.19
Representative Matters
- Representing telecommunications and consumer products company in CPSC recall investigation.
- Counseling recreational vehicle company in CPSC untimely reporting matter.
- Representing clients and multiple third parties in DOJ and state attorneys general investigations.
- Defending health care distributor against manufacturing and design defect allegations in multidistrict litigation.
- Counseling infant safety company executives in NHTSA investigation and subsequent Congressional hearing.
Shane's Insights
Client Alert | 7 min read | 08.22.23
FTC Pushes Enforcement Frontier Against Board Interlocks and Information Sharing Among Competitors
The Federal Trade Commission took a major step recently to crack down on unlawful interlocking directorates and leverage its “standalone” authority that prohibits “unfair methods of competition.” In a complaint and consent order issued last week, the FTC alleged that a transaction between EQT Corporation and QEP Partners, LP (Quantum) violated Section 8 of the Clayton Act, the first time in 40 years that the agency has enforced the statute. The FTC also alleged that the transaction and an existing joint venture independently violated Section 5 of the FTC Act based largely on the prospective ability to share competitively sensitive information, an expansive theory of harm. The consent order goes well beyond the typical remedy for a Section 8 violation – prohibiting the interlock – and also prohibits Quantum from serving on certain other competitors’ boards without prior approval of the Commission. The Section 5 information sharing remedy is similarly aggressive, requiring the parties to dissolve an existing “cozy” joint-venture and requiring Quantum to divest all EQT shares it acquired in the underlying transaction. These novel theories of harm and aggressive remedies are a warning shot to companies that the agencies are ramping up scrutiny of board interlocks and competitor information exchanges.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 07.20.23
Turning Back The Clock? Agencies Seek to Remake and Expand Merger Prohibitions
Client Alert | 5 min read | 11.12.19
Insights
Shane's Insights
Client Alert | 7 min read | 08.22.23
FTC Pushes Enforcement Frontier Against Board Interlocks and Information Sharing Among Competitors
The Federal Trade Commission took a major step recently to crack down on unlawful interlocking directorates and leverage its “standalone” authority that prohibits “unfair methods of competition.” In a complaint and consent order issued last week, the FTC alleged that a transaction between EQT Corporation and QEP Partners, LP (Quantum) violated Section 8 of the Clayton Act, the first time in 40 years that the agency has enforced the statute. The FTC also alleged that the transaction and an existing joint venture independently violated Section 5 of the FTC Act based largely on the prospective ability to share competitively sensitive information, an expansive theory of harm. The consent order goes well beyond the typical remedy for a Section 8 violation – prohibiting the interlock – and also prohibits Quantum from serving on certain other competitors’ boards without prior approval of the Commission. The Section 5 information sharing remedy is similarly aggressive, requiring the parties to dissolve an existing “cozy” joint-venture and requiring Quantum to divest all EQT shares it acquired in the underlying transaction. These novel theories of harm and aggressive remedies are a warning shot to companies that the agencies are ramping up scrutiny of board interlocks and competitor information exchanges.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 07.20.23
Turning Back The Clock? Agencies Seek to Remake and Expand Merger Prohibitions
Client Alert | 5 min read | 11.12.19
