A lawyer for Kwame Kilpatrick said Thursday that the ex-Detroit mayor would fight Wednesday's indictment.

"Mr. Kilpatrick will vigorously defend these allegations," Farmington Hills attorney Arnold Reed said at a news conference. He said an indictment is no evidence of guilt and that Kilpatrick committed no crime.

Reed, who said he serves as Kilpatrick's appellate lawyer, scoffed at the indictment.
"A federal grand jury will indict an empty glass of water if told to do so by the prosecution," he said.

He said he talked with Kilpatrick on Thursday and that the ex-mayor wants to do everything he can to fight the charges. Reed also said that the indictment is making Kilpatrick more focused.

Reed said he plans soon to appeal the probation violation sentence of 18 months to five years that Kilpatrick received May 25 for hiding assets to avoid paying $1 million in court-ordered restitution resulting from his 2008 perjury conviction. Reed wants Kilpatrick released on bond from state prison pending appeal.

Attorneys at the law firm of Gallop, Johnson & Neuman, L.C. are advising companies considering mergers, tender offers, acquisition transactions and joint ventures of any size to carefully examine any potential antitrust risks prior to closing the business deal.  

That is because the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) are increasing scrutiny of transactions that could potentially lessen competition or create a monopoly, even when those transactions do not warrant mandatory review under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act’s (Hart-Scott) jurisdictional and filing-fee thresholds for transactions triggering mandatory antitrust review.  

Glenn E. Davis, chair of the Antitrust Practice Group at Gallop, Johnson & Neuman, said, “Identifying potential antitrust issues prior to closing a deal could save companies considerable effort and expense in litigating against a federal antitrust agency over a relatively modest transaction, or permit proactive planning to structure deals to avoid or minimize risk.”

On January 19, 2010, the FTC announced that for the first time it was lowering the Hart-Scott jurisdictional and filing-fee thresholds for transactions that prompt mandatory antitrust review. The 2010 revisions decreased the basic notification threshold for all transactions from $65.2 million to $63.4 million.

Amy K. Mistler, attorney in the Antitrust Practice Group at Gallop, Johnson & Neuman, said, “While Hart-Scott only requires federal notification for transactions exceeding $63.4 million, this year the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission have significantly increased antitrust review of transactions falling below the Hart-Scott threshold as well.”  

“The FTC and DOJ are keeping an especially close watch on mergers and acquisitions that result in one company gaining a substantial share of its relevant market,” Davis noted. For example, in January of 2010 the DOJ filed suit against Dean Foods Co., the country’s largest processor and distributor of dairy products, for antitrust violations in its $35 million acquisition of two Wisconsin dairy-processing plants from a local dairy cooperative.  The DOJ alleged that the deal was likely to substantially lessen competition in milk sales to schools and convenience stores in Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan.

In March of 2010, the DOJ challenged a $5 million merger between the country’s two largest providers of voting machine equipment because the deal gave one company control over more than 70 percent of the voting-machine market. After filing suit to challenge the merger, the DOJ reached a settlement agreement with Election Systems & Software, Inc.  

In May 2010, the FTC filed suit against Dun & Bradstreet Corp. because the database company’s $29 million acquisition of competitor Quality Education Data (QED) gave it more than 90 percent of the market for K-12 education data.  When the suit was filed, Richard Feinstein, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition, announced: “Despite its relatively low dollar value, this transaction dramatically decreased competition in the marketplace…When Dun & Bradstreet acquired QED, it bought its closest competitor and created a monopoly. That’s going to get the FTC’s attention every time.”

For more information, contact Glenn E. Davis or Amy K. Mistler at 314.615.6000 with questions or concerns regarding federal antitrust policy or review. A complete list of the 2010 adjusted thresholds can be accessed via the FTC website at http://www.ftc.gov/os/fedreg/2010/january/1001218claytonact7a.pdf. 

Gallop, Johnson & Neuman, L.C., a full service law firm of 80 attorneys, has provided legal services to clients in diverse industries since 1976 and is one of the largest law firms in St. Louis. The firm serves public corporations; privately-held companies; entrepreneurs and start-up enterprises; individuals and families; trustees and trust beneficiaries; charities; and non-profit entities. 

For more information about Gallop, Johnson & Neuman, contact Lois A. LaDriere, Director of Marketing, at 314.615.6000 or see the website http://www.gjn.com.

While busy running a general store that caters to the growing number of Latinos in this Nebraska meatpacking town, Alfredo Velez had new concerns Tuesday after his neighbors voted for an ordinance to crack down on illegal immigrants.

To Velez, the vote a day earlier in Fremont to ban hiring or renting property to illegal immigrants sent a clear message: "We're not welcome here," said Velez, a native of Mexico who became a U.S. citizen in 1985.

As a business owner, though, he worried about his store, Guerrero, which sells food and other products from Mexico and Central America.

"How much more in taxes am I going to have to pay for this thing to go to court?" wondered Velez, 56. "We're all going to have to pay for it, no matter what color our skin is."

With roughly 57 percent of voters supporting the ordinance, Fremont joins Arizona and a few other cities in the national debate over immigration regulations. The community about 35 miles northwest of Omaha has seen its Hispanic population surge in the past two decades, largely due to the jobs available at the nearby Fremont Beef and Hormel plants.

Supporters argued the measure was necessary to make up for what they see as lax federal law enforcement. Trevor McClurg said the measure is fair because it's aimed at people who aren't legally in the U.S.

Federal agents have arrested a man accused of hacking into computers to obtain personal data to extort sexually explicit videos from women and teenage girls in exchange for keeping their information private.

The Los Angeles U.S. attorney's office says 31-year-old Luis Mijangos was arrested Tuesday in Santa Ana.

FBI experts say he infected more than 100 computers used by about 230 people, including at least 44 juveniles.

The alleged scheme involved using peer-to-peer networks to infect computers, induce victims to download malware disguised as songs, and control those computers to spread malware through contact lists.

Mijangos allegedly searched computers for sexual or intimate images to blackmail victims into making videos for him. Prosecutors say he also was able to control some webcams to capture intimate scenes.

A federal judge heard new testimony Wednesday in the case of a Georgia death row inmate given a rare chance by the U.S. Supreme Court to prove his innocence nearly 20 years after a jury convicted him of killing a police officer.

Attorneys for Troy Anthony Davis say witnesses who identified him as the killer of Savannah police officer Mark MacPhail during Davis' 1991 trial were pressured by police into making false statements. New witnesses have since come forward to say another man confessed to the slaying after Davis was convicted.

In U.S. District Court on Wednesday, Davis' lawyers rested their case after calling nine witnesses to support that claim. The hearing will continue Thursday with prosecutors presenting rebuttal evidence.

Judge William T. Moore said he's highly skeptical of testimony that another man has admitted to shooting MacPhail, because Davis' attorneys did not subpoena the man they say is the real killer.

The Supreme Court has sided with former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling in limiting the use of a federal fraud law that has been a favorite of white-collar crime prosecutors.

The court said Thursday that the "honest services" law could not be used in convicting Skilling for his role in the collapse of Enron. But Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in her majority opinion that the ruling does not necessarily require Skilling's conviction to be overturned.

During arguments in December and March, several justices seemed inclined to limit prosecutors' use of this law, which critics have said is vague and has been used to make a crime out of mistakes and minor transgressions in the business and political world.

The court, at the same time, rejected Skilling's claim that he did not get a fair trial in Houston because of harshly critical publicity that surrounded the case in Enron's hometown.

The court in this ruling also sided with former newspaper magnate Conrad Black, setting aside a federal appeals court decision that had upheld Black's honest services fraud conviction. But as in Skilling's case, the justices left the ultimate resolution of the case to the appeals court.

The justices also threw out an appeals court ruling against former Alaska legislator Bruce Weyhrauch, who is facing charges under the honest services law.

Thursday's ruling could affect the ongoing prosecution of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and the convictions of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman and ex-HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy.

Lawyers for thousands of Sept. 11 responders are back in a New York City court trying to rally support for a deal that would end a seven-year legal fight over the toxic fallout caused by the collapse of the World Trade Center.

U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein earlier this month gave his preliminary approval to a deal that would resolve lawsuits filed by nearly 10,000 police officers, firefighters and construction workers suing the city over their exposure to toxic ash. He was scheduled to hear more testimony on the settlement Wednesday.

Opponents of the deal may be given a chance to speak against it, although the judge has indicated he favors it.

The settlement would pay between $625 million and $712.5 million, depending on how many people take it.