Antitrust / Competition

Our approach to antitrust matters is decidedly different from other firms because, in addition to representing classes composed of individuals, we have also represented multi-national corporations, as well as medium and small businesses as both plaintiffs and defendants. We are selective in the litigation we pursue and consistently position that litigation for success in the courtroom. We have found this approach yields the best results for our clients, whether at the settlement table or at trial. We carefully consider the objectives and economic realities in every case, looking for the best way to achieve an outcome that meets the needs of our clients.

The experience and track record of our attorneys in antitrust, consumer fraud, and other mass actions has been recognized in courts across the nation. We have recovered hundreds of millions for our plaintiff clients, and we have successfully defended other clients in mitigating their most significant exposures. We have substantial experience not just settling the antitrust, consumer fraud and mass actions that we handle, but trying them.

<<< Back to Complex Litigation Overview

Select Representative Experience

  • In re Microsoft Antitrust Litigation(MDL 1332 and Multiple State Class Cases). Represented indirect purchaser antitrust class action in federal MDL, and appointed lead or co-lead in several states including Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin, to represent separate state classes of indirect purchasers for illegal monopolization in the market for personal computer operating system, word processing and spreadsheet software. Settlements of nearly $600 million.
  • In re NCAA Athletic Grant-In-Aid-Cap Antitrust Litigation, MDL 2541 (N.D. Cal.). Representation of student athletes for grants to cover the cost of attendance.
  • DRAM Antitrust Litigation, MDL 1486 (N.D. Cal.). Represented a nationwide class of indirect purchasers for conspiracy to fix prices.
  • In re Aftermarket Automotive Filters Antitrust Litigation, MDL 1957 (N.D. Ill.). Co-Lead counsel of indirect purchaser class.
  • TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation, MDL 1827 (N.D. Cal.). Represented a nationwide class of indirect purchasers of LCD products, as flat panel televisions and computer monitors, in this multi-district antitrust class action filed against the world’s leading manufacturers of thin-film transistor liquid crystal display (TFT-LCD), and alleging that these companies engaged in a conspiracy to artificially inflate the prices of their LCD products.
  • In re Suboxone Antitrust Litigation, MDL 2445 (E.D. Pa.). Member of executive committee representing endpayors who alleged drug maker illegally sought to extend its drug monopoly and keep opiate addiction treatment off the market.
  • State of New Mexico, et al., v. Visa, Inc., et al. (New Mexico D. Ct., Santa Fe District). Appointed as Special Assistant Attorney General to the State of New Mexico in case alleging payment card interchange fees violate state antitrust and consumer fraud laws.
  • In re Midwest Milk Monopolization Litigation, MDL 83 (W.D. Mo.). Represented milk cooperatives in defense of claims under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act.

<<< Back to Complex Litigation Overview