Dylan Carson

Dylan Carson is a trial attorney with major experience in antitrust litigation, federal and state government antitrust investigations, and competition law counseling. For more than 20 years, Dylan has represented clients in federal and state court antitrust trials, before judges and juries, as both plaintiff and defendant. A former trial attorney at the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Dylan is among the short list of antitrust attorneys to have successfully prosecuted and defended high-stakes merger trials. In private practice, he has represented clients before federal and state antitrust enforcers, including the Antitrust Division, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and state attorneys general.

Dylan offers clients his knowledge of public and private antitrust enforcement in Washington, D.C., and around the country to navigate the complexities of civil and criminal enforcement and private litigation. He has advised clients on shepherding mergers and acquisitions through the approval process, handling federal and state government antitrust investigations, prosecuting and defending private antitrust actions, and crafting compliance programs to avoid the risk of antitrust enforcement and treble damages actions. He has represented parties involved in merger and civil nonmerger investigations in diverse industries, including media and telecommunications, real estate, health care, e-commerce, online platforms, energy generation and distribution, finance, casinos, and food and soft drinks.

While at the Antitrust Division, Dylan received the Attorney General’s Award for Distinguished Service, which is the second highest award for employee performance at the DOJ. He was also honored with the Assistant Attorney General Award of Distinction—the highest Antitrust Division performance award—three years in a row for his investigation and litigation efforts. Some of his most impactful work includes being one of the key trial lawyers in courtroom challenges to two of the largest mergers in history as well as in a challenge to a dominant technology firm’s attempt to acquire an innovative rival.

Partner

Dylan Carson

Washington, D.C.

202.585.6680

Services

Antitrust and Competition

Office

Washington, D.C., Los Angeles

On This Page

Bio

Dylan Carson

Dylan Carson is a trial attorney with major experience in antitrust litigation, federal and state government antitrust investigations, and competition law counseling. For more than 20 years, Dylan has represented clients in federal and state court antitrust trials, before judges and juries, as both plaintiff and defendant. A former trial attorney at the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Dylan is among the short list of antitrust attorneys to have successfully prosecuted and defended high-stakes merger trials. In private practice, he has represented clients before federal and state antitrust enforcers, including the Antitrust Division, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and state attorneys general.

Dylan offers clients his knowledge of public and private antitrust enforcement in Washington, D.C., and around the country to navigate the complexities of civil and criminal enforcement and private litigation. He has advised clients on shepherding mergers and acquisitions through the approval process, handling federal and state government antitrust investigations, prosecuting and defending private antitrust actions, and crafting compliance programs to avoid the risk of antitrust enforcement and treble damages actions. He has represented parties involved in merger and civil nonmerger investigations in diverse industries, including media and telecommunications, real estate, health care, e-commerce, online platforms, energy generation and distribution, finance, casinos, and food and soft drinks.

While at the Antitrust Division, Dylan received the Attorney General’s Award for Distinguished Service, which is the second highest award for employee performance at the DOJ. He was also honored with the Assistant Attorney General Award of Distinction—the highest Antitrust Division performance award—three years in a row for his investigation and litigation efforts. Some of his most impactful work includes being one of the key trial lawyers in courtroom challenges to two of the largest mergers in history as well as in a challenge to a dominant technology firm’s attempt to acquire an innovative rival.

Experience

At the DOJ, served as trial attorney representing United States:

  • Represented the DOJ in three-week merger trial in District of Columbia seeking to block $108 billion merger of country’s largest video distributor with largest content provider.
  • Represented the DOJ in three-week merger trial in District of Columbia seeking to block $54 billion combination of two of the largest national health insurers. The merger was enjoined.
  • Represented the DOJ in the investigation of the $26 billion merger of two of four national wireless carriers. The merger challenge was resolved by consent decree.
  • Represented the DOJ in a Northern District of California challenge to a dominant payment network’s proposed $5 billion acquisition of a nascent financial technology competitor under Sherman Act Section 1 and Clayton Act Section 7. The merger was abandoned.
  • Represented the DOJ in a two-week merger trial in the District of Delaware seeking to block the proposed $360 million merger of travel technology companies. The merger was abandoned.
  • Represented the DOJ in Sherman Act Section 1 and Clayton Act Section 7 litigation in the Middle District of Pennsylvania regarding a hospital’s $100 million acquisition of ownership interest in its close competitor. The litigation was resolved by consent decree.
  • Represented the DOJ in a Sherman Act Section 1 litigation in the Central District of California alleging information sharing among video distribution competitors regarding a regional sports network. The litigation was resolved by consent decree.
  • Represented the DOJ in a Sherman Act Section 2 investigation of an Internet search provider for monopoly maintenance in search advertising.

In private practice:

  • Outside litigation counsel for the California Attorney General in a price-fixing case against global gasoline trading firms.
  • Trial counsel on the defense team that successfully opposed the FTC’s challenge to a proposed merger in the baby food business after a two-week merger trial in the District of Columbia.
  • Trial counsel on the defense team for a major international telecommunications firm in a three-week antitrust trial in Orange County (California) Superior Court regarding the alleged tying of a telephone service and a high-voltage protection service. The jury rendered a 12-0 defense verdict.
  • Trial counsel for a state public utility authority in a two-week administrative trial at the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission regarding market power in the New England power generation market.
  • Litigation counsel for the defendants in opposing DOJ Antitrust Division’s challenge of a merger of submersible turbine petroleum pump manufacturers.

Accomplishments

Keynote and Panelist, “Antitrust in Real Estate: The New Rules of the Road,” Cary, North Carolina, September 19, 2024.

Speaker, “Spotlight on Antitrust Enforcement in Healthcare: Fundamentals and Updates,” California Society of Healthcare Attorneys, May 2024.

Speaker, “Value of MLS – Data Tells the Story,” Council of Multiple Listing Services annual conference, October 5, 2023. 

Attorney General’s Award for Distinguished Service, U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division

Assistant Attorney General Award of Distinction, U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division

Admitted to practice in California, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Massachusetts and New York

Quoted, “DOJ Pushes AI Price-Fixing Argument in Vegas Hotel Case Appeal,” Bloomberg Law, October 30, 2024.

Quoted, “New HSR Rules Trigger Mixed Response Among Practitioners,” Global Competition Review, October 16, 2024.

Quoted, “Real Assets Gold Rush? Why BlackRock, Ares, Blue Owl Are Bulking Up,” FundFire, October 16, 2024.

Quoted, “DOJ RealPage Suit Buoys Private Algorithmic Price-Fixing Cases,” Bloomberg Law, August 29, 2024.

Quoted, “DOJ's Use of Wiretaps in Small-Time Bid-Rigging Case Has Put Compliance Teams on Red Alert,” Law.com, May 31, 2024.

Co-authored, “AI and Antitrust Considerations in U.S. Health Care,” Competition Policy International, May 31, 2024.

Quoted, “Will Federal Antitrust Moves Push More into Real Estate?,” Fund Fire, May 29, 2024.

Quoted, “Travellers Sue to Block Alaska/Hawaiian,” Global Competition Review, April 16, 2024.

Quoted, “Federal Judges Greenlit DOJ’s NAR Probe. Now What?,” The Real Deal, April 10, 2024.

Quoted, “JetBlue and Spirit Abandon Merger,” Global Competition Review March 5, 2024.

Co-author, “Complying With Enforcers' Ephemeral Messaging Guidance,” Law360, March 4, 2024.

Quoted, “JetBlue Cancels Spirit Deal After Icahn Agreement,” The Deal, March 4, 2024.

Quoted, “Antitrust Enforcers Race to Stay Ahead of AI's Skynet Problem,” Corporate Counsel, February 16, 2024.

Quoted, “Behind the collapse of NAR’s big vision for brokers,” The Real Deal, February 1, 2024.

Quoted, “CTFN Analysis: In HA/ALK, DOJ review to prioritize leisure travel between West Coast overlaps,” CTFN, January 30, 2024.

Quoted, “JetBlue raises doubts over merger with Spirit,” Global Competition Review, January 29, 2024.

Quoted, “CTFN Week Ahead Roundup,” CTFN, January 28, 2024.

Quoted, “JetBlue Says It May Back Out of Deal to Acquire Spirit Airlines,” The New York Times, January 26, 2024.

Quoted, “JetBlue faces uphill battle on appeal, experts say,” Global Competition Review, January 25, 2024.

Quoted, “Spirit Airlines Is on Shaky Footing After Judge Blocks JetBlue Deal ,” The New York Times, January 19, 2024.

Quoted, “Judge Blocks JetBlue From Acquiring Spirit Airlines,” The New York Times, January 16, 2024.

Co-author, “Fresh Off the Grill: No-Poach Agreements May Lead to Per Se Antitrust Liability, Says U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit,” Employee Relations Law Journal, January 2, 2024.

Quoted, “US agencies make tweaks with finalised merger guidelines ,” Global Competition Review, December 19, 2023.

Quoted, “Bid-rigging reversal risks “serious blow” to DOJ, practitioners say,” Global Competition Review, December 5, 2023.

Quoted, “Antitrust Regulators Poised to Pounce as AI Firms Jostle for Dominance ,” Corporate Counsel, November 21, 2023.

Co-author, “Health Care Is in DOJ’s Criminal Antitrust Crosshairs,” Law360, April 8, 2022.

Co-author, “Location, Location, Location: Real Estate Will Continue to Be an Antitrust Hotspot in 2022,” Inman News, February 2, 2022.

Co-author, “The Curious Case of the Vertical Merger Guidelines,” Global Competition Review, October 6, 2021.

Co-author, “What Food Industry Can Expect After Biden Antitrust Order,” Law360, July 23, 2021.

Co-author, “Pharma Cos. Can Expect Harsh Antitrust Scrutiny From Biden,” Law360, April 28, 2021.

Co-author, “Circuits Reinforce Split Over When Noerr-Pennington Shields Serial Litigants,” The Antitrust Source, February 2021.

Author, “Putting the Tunney in Tunney Act: Will Evidentiary Hearings Become the Main Event after CVS/Aetna,” The Antitrust Source, August 2020.

Co-author, “Off-Label Use of the Cartwright Act: Will Cipro Require State Courts to Assess Federal Patent Validity in Pay-for-Delay Cases?” Competition, The Journal of the Antitrust, UCL and Privacy Section of the State Bar of California, Fall 2015.

California

Colorado

Washington D.C.

Massachusetts

New York

Suffolk University Law School, J.D., 1997

Vassar College, B.A., History, 1994

Related Practices

Services

Advertising, Marketing and Media

Litigation

California State Government and Regulatory Policy and Government Contracts

Antitrust and Competition

Industries

Manatt Health

Manatt Real Estate

Artificial Intelligence

Join our newsletter to stay up to date on features and releases.

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING, pursuant to New York DR 2-101(f)

© 2025 Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP. All rights reserved.

Newsletter Subscription