Trending
CNN Town Hall Reminds Us that Harris Would be a Cautious, Pragmatic, and Boring President. That’s Why Americans Should Vote for Her
CNN Town Hall Reminds Us that Harris Would be a Cautious, Pragmatic, and Boring President. That’s Why Americans Should Vote for Her
By
Analysis of the Fifth Circuit’s Ruling in Republican National Committee v. Wetzel, Involving the Counting of Ballots That Are Postmarked Before Election Day but that Arrive to Election Offices A Few Days After Polls Close
Analysis of the Fifth Circuit’s Ruling in Republican National Committee v. Wetzel, Involving the Counting of Ballots That Are Postmarked Before Election Day but that Arrive to Election Offices A Few Days After Polls Close
By and
How Harris Can Use Biden’s Latest Gaffe to Her Advantage and Deliver an Invaluable Civics Lesson
How Harris Can Use Biden’s Latest Gaffe to Her Advantage and Deliver an Invaluable Civics Lesson
By
Samuel R. Miller
Samuel R. Miller

Samuel R. Miller is an adjunct professor at UC Hastngs and Senior Counsel in the San Francisco office of Sidley Austin LLP. Mr. Miller focuses his litigation practice in areas of antitrust, intellectual property, and complex civil litigation. In 1994, he was recruited by the Antitrust Division to serve as lead counsel in the first Section 2 monopolization case brought by the Department of Justice against Microsoft Corporation. He has represented major national and international companies in price-fixing government investigations and private class actions in both Federal and State courts. He has also represented a number of companies in matters relating to the conduct of a dominant firm. He was involved in the creation of a standard-setting organization involving major semiconductor and consumer electronics companies. He was invited to testify before the Federal Trade Commission in hearings related to the antitrust issues involving standard-setting. He has been recognized in Chambers USA, the Legal 500, Northern California Super Lawyers, the Best Lawyers in America, Who’s Who Legal and Global Competition Review 100 for his antitrust work. He has published numerous articles relating to antitrust and other issues.

Columns by Samuel R. Miller
Permalink to Is Amazon Violating the Antitrust Laws?Is Amazon Violating the Antitrust Laws?
Is Amazon Violating the Antitrust Laws?

Guest columnist and UC Hastings adjunct professor Samuel R. Miller considers whether Amazon is violating antitrust laws if it is (as is alleged) misusing data it obtains from third-party transactions. Miller explains two potential theories of antitrust liability—the “essential facilities” doctrine and the “monopoly leveraging” theory—and discusses the extent to which Amazon might be liable under each theory.

Permalink to Time for a New—and Effective—AntitrustTime for a New—and Effective—Antitrust
Time for a New—and Effective—Antitrust
and

Thomas Greaney and Samuel Miller—both adjunct professors at UC Hastings College of the Law and former attorneys with the Antitrust Division of the US Department of Justice—describe how antitrust law in the United States no longer operates as a legal sword to keep markets competitive, but as a shield to protect large companies from competition. Greaney and Miller call for a renewal of the antitrust enterprise using the best of current economics informed by a realistic appreciation for how markets actually work in the real world.

Permalink to More Aggressive Antitrust Enforcement Would Create More Jobs and Grow the EconomyMore Aggressive Antitrust Enforcement Would Create More Jobs and Grow the Economy
More Aggressive Antitrust Enforcement Would Create More Jobs and Grow the Economy

Guest columnist and UC Hastings adjunct professor Samuel R. Miller contrasts the recent decision by antitrust enforcers in Europe to fine Google $2.7 billion for abusing its dominant position in internet search with the FTC’s decision not to pursue an antitrust case against Google based on similar allegations. Miller argues that the US should shift toward the EU’s position on antitrust law and that such a policy change would not even require any modifications of statutory language.