ARTICLE
23 July 2026

DOJ Reinstates Targeted Second Requests

WT
Winston Taylor

Contributor

Whether you're leading the way, disrupting an industry, entering a new phase of growth, or launching a defining product—we're in the room with you. In the action. Sleeves rolled up.

With a rich history spanning both sides of the Atlantic, we are present in the major commercial centers that matter to our clients: the U.S., the U.K., Europe, Latin America, and the Middle East. Combining scale with the speed clients demand, our defining capabilities include major litigation, critical transactions, strategic IP, and private wealth.

Our team of over 1,400 lawyers works hand-in-hand across markets, sectors, practice areas, and client teams. All-in problem solvers, we bring the creativity to think differently, and the pragmatism to get things done when it counts the most.

Embedded in your business and sharing your ambition, we take the work personally. Shaping what we do and how we do it around your goals and needs, always one step ahead of the moment.

The Department of Justice has announced a significant shift in its merger review process by reinstating targeted Second Request investigations, moving away from the Biden Administration's broad, document-intensive approach. This policy change aims to reduce bureaucratic burdens while maintaining investigative integrity, potentially streamlining the HSR Act review process for companies pursuing mergers and acquisitions. The new "quick look" approach may dramatically reduce compliance timelines and resource r
United States Antitrust/Competition Law

On July 23, 2026, the DOJ announced that it is reinstating its use of targeted Second Request investigations to expedite merger reviews. The DOJ made use of targeted Second Requests before the Biden Administration on an ad-hoc basis. However, during the Biden Administration, the agency shifted away from the practice in favor of broad, document-intensive requests. According to Associate Attorney General Stanley E. Woodward Jr., the return of targeted Second Requests is designed “to eliminate bureaucratic burdens while still preserving the integrity of Second Request investigations.”

Under the HSR Act, mergers or acquisitions above certain transaction value thresholds must notify the FTC and the DOJ prior to consummating a reportable transaction. The HSR filing submission commences a 30-day waiting period during which the agencies will investigate the transaction. During this time, the agencies may request information from the parties pursuant to a voluntary access letter, which the parties will typically provide in hopes of avoiding a more burdensome Second Request. If the reviewing agency has not resolved its concerns within the initial 30-day period, the Acquiring Party may voluntarily pull-and-refile their HSR filing a single time. This procedure restarts the 30-day waiting period.

If the reviewing agency has not resolved its concerns within the relevant waiting period, it will issue a Second Request, which is a comprehensive compulsory request for documents and information. Issuance of the Second Request freezes the transaction and extends the waiting period indefinitely until the companies certify they have “substantially complied” with the request. Complying with a traditional Second Request is burdensome and time-intensive, often taking up to six months and potentially requiring the production of millions of documents and depositions of multiple witnesses.

Under the DOJ’s Revised Model Timing Agreement, the Antitrust Division will now “structure its review of the Proposed Acquisition to prioritize information and documents that relate to issues that the Division determines, in its sole discretion, to be potentially determinative.” The return of these so-called “quick look” targeted Second Requests may significantly reduce the burden on the parties and the DOJ by significantly narrowing the scale of document collection and production and allowing for a more expedited review period, particularly in a period when the DOJ has suffered a significant reduction in its investigative and litigation resources.

Law clerk Michelle Slezinger also contributed to this blog post.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More