Top related persons:
Top related locs:
Top related orgs:

Search resuls for: "Brent Kendall"


6 mentions found


Rupert Murdoch's The Wall Street Journal made widespread cuts to its DC bureau on Thursday in a restructuring that several insiders called a "bloodbath." They were also, however, expected, since staffers had been told a restructuring was coming in preparation for the installation of the Journal's new Washington coverage chief Damian Paletta, who starts February 5. The new Washington bureau will focus on politics, policy, defense, law, intelligence and national security. The expanded Finance & Economics coverage area will unify our reporting on the macroeconomy, global economic trends, monetary policy, credit and banking, and financial markets. Brent Kendall, the law bureau chief, will take on the expanded role of Justice, Judiciary and Law Editor.
Persons: Rupert Murdoch's, Amara Omeokwe, James Graff, Emma Tucker, Tucker, Damian Paletta, Jodi Green, Liz Harris, they'd, Marie Beaudette, Marie, Damian, Brent Kendall, Brent, Emma Organizations: Journal, Business, News Corp, Staff, Finance, Federal Reserve, Economics, Justice, Judiciary Locations: Washington, New York, China, U.S
How Supreme Court Justices Sparred on Affirmative Action
  + stars: | 2023-06-29 | by ( Brent Kendall | ) www.wsj.com   time to read: 1 min
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com. https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-supreme-court-justices-sparred-on-affirmative-action-50087fa3
Persons: Dow Jones
The Federal Trade Commission is preparing a potential antitrust lawsuit against Amazon .com Inc. that in the coming months could challenge an array of the tech giant’s business practices as anticompetitive, according to people familiar with the matter. The timing of any case remains in flux, some of the people said. The commission also could opt not to proceed, and doesn’t always bring cases even when it is making preparations to do so.
‘Fortnite’ made its debut in 2017 and quickly became one of the world’s most popular shooter videogames. Epic Games Inc. has agreed to pay $520 million to resolve Federal Trade Commission allegations that the “Fortnite” videogame developer violated online privacy protections for children and tricked players into making unintended purchases. The FTC said the agreement consisted of two record-breaking settlements that resolve a pair of civil complaints it was filing against Epic. One, filed in federal court, alleged the company violated the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act by collecting personal information from “Fortnite” players under the age of 13 without notifying their parents or obtaining verifiable parental consent.
The Federal Trade Commission argues the deal would give Microsoft the incentive and ability to degrade or withhold Activision’s content on rival systems. In challenging Microsoft Corp.’s $75 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard Inc., the Federal Trade Commission is building its marquee antitrust case of Chair Lina Khan’s tenure on expansive legal theories that haven’t prevailed in other recent cases. The lawsuit targets a so-called vertical merger that would combine Microsoft’s software, devices and cloud-computing business with Activision’s library of blockbuster videogames. The FTC argues the deal would give Microsoft the incentive and ability to degrade or withhold Activision’s content on rival systems, principally hurting Sony , its major competitor in gaming consoles and other platforms.
The court’s decision is a win for UnitedHealth, which owns the largest U.S. health insurer and a sprawling healthcare operation that comprises thousands of doctors as well as clinics and valuable data. August 22, 2022, USA: UnitedHealth Group headquarters in Minnetonka, Minnesota. (Credit Image: © File/Minneapolis Star Tribune via ZUMA Press Wire)WASHINGTON—A federal judge Monday ruled against a Justice Department antitrust challenge to UnitedHealth Group $13 billion acquisition of health-technology firm Change Healthcare rejecting government claims that the deal would unlawfully suppress competition and limit innovation in health-insurance markets. U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols ruled for the companies in an opinion that he kept under seal for now because he said it “may contain competitively sensitive information.” The judge said he would release a redacted public version of the ruling in the coming days. In a one-page public order, he denied the Justice Department’s request to block the companies from completing the deal.
Total: 6