Source: https://www.crowell.com/Practices/Antitrust/Civil-Antitrust-Litigation
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 10:25:54+00:00

Document:
Antitrust litigation continues to become more expansive and complex, and increasingly more common. Not only are business practices more frequently challenged under the antitrust laws, but antitrust claims and counterclaims more often arise in other kinds of business disputes. We are not generalists who dabble in the occasional antitrust case, but antitrust professionals with deep knowledge and experience capable of handling any and all types of antitrust litigation.
We defend claims of price fixing, handle cases involving exclusive dealing, refusals to deal, tying and bundling, group boycotts, and actual or attempted monopolization. We have litigated claims brought under the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act, the Robinson-Patman Act, the Lanham Act, California's Cartwright Act and a host of other state antitrust and unfair competition laws. The size of our group and the depth of our substantive antitrust experience make us uniquely qualified to litigate the most complex and novel antitrust issues as they arise, and also make us extremely efficient at litigating simpler or more common antitrust issues.
Our litigators combine substantive antitrust knowledge with practical experience. We are equally skilled at trying the most complex disputes and navigating the procedural and logistical challenges of large multidistrict litigation (MDL) class actions. We also understand that private antitrust lawsuits are often large and resource intensive, and we take pride in our ability to litigate both effectively and efficiently. Many of our antitrust litigators also counsel our clients on antitrust issues, making us particularly attuned to our clients' larger business objectives in any dispute, and better able to translate litigation issues into cost-effective preventive counseling.
U.S. v. AT&T Inc. et al. Representing AT&T as antitrust counsel in its proposed $85 billion acquisition of Time Warner.
In re Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation. Representing CSX Transportation in defense of Sherman Act Section 1 multidistrict class action litigation alleging conspiracy to fix fuel surcharge prices. Prevailed in defeating class certification on remand from the D.C. Circuit’s prior opinion vacating the district court’s previous ruling certifying the class.
In re Domestic Airline Travel Antitrust Litigation. Representing United Airlines in pending putative class actions alleging that the major airlines participated in a price fixing conspiracy by coordinating their capacity decisions through third parties such as investment analysts and institutional investors.
In re Blue Cross Blue Shield Antitrust Litigation. Representing Blue Cross Blue Shield in pending multidistrict litigation alleging that the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association and its member plans restrained competition and raised prices by allocating geographic markets.
Karen Tichy v. Hyatt Hotels Corp., et al. Representing Marriott in a class action antitrust lawsuit against the major hotel companies alleging the companies engaged in a conspiracy regarding keyword advertising.
Marion Healthcare v. Becton Dickinson, et al. Recently won a motion to dismiss for Owens & Minor in a class-action lawsuit filed by a group of healthcare providers alleging an industry-wide conspiracy in the safety syringe and catheter market.
Academy of Allergy & Asthma in Primary Care, et al., v. Louisiana Health Service and Indemnity Co., et al. Representing Humana in antitrust litigation regarding allergy testing and allergen immunotherapy.
Titanium Dioxide Antitrust Litigation: Represented Chemours (and legacy entity DuPont) in defense of Sherman Act Section 1 class action litigation alleging conspiracy to fix the price of titanium dioxide. Prevailed in federal district court on summary judgment in an opt-out case brought by Valspar; summary judgment affirmed by the Third Circuit.
Suture Express, Inc. v. Cardinal Health & Owens & Minor. Represented Owens & Minor, the nation’s leading distributor of medical and surgical products, in litigation alleging tying and exclusive dealing. Prevailed in federal district court on summary judgment, which was affirmed by the Tenth Circuit.
U.S. et al. v. Aetna Inc. et al.: Represented Humana as lead trial counsel in connection with the U.S. Department of Justice’s challenge of the company’s proposed merger with Aetna, valued at approximately $39 billion.
TCL v. Ericsson: Represented Ericsson in precedent-setting antitrust and contract litigation to determine FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory) licensing terms for a worldwide portfolio of standard-essential mobile-telecommunications patents, successfully winning dismissal of the Unfair Competition Law claims.
In re Optical Disk Drive Antitrust Litigation. We represented HP Inc., one of the world’s largest manufacturer of personal computers, Ingram Micro and SYNNEX, the world’s largest and third largest distributors of technology products in a complex antitrust litigation against manufacturers of optical disk drives for devising and implementing a long-standing price-fixing conspiracy. We helped our clients defeat motions to dismiss filed by the defendants, as well as successfully represented our clients through fact and expert discovery, motions for summary judgment and Daubert motions. As the case was heading to trial, HP, Ingram Micro and SYNNEX Corp. settled on favorable terms with the defendants, recovering tens of millions of dollars in overcharges.
DuPont/Kolon litigation and related investigations. After our trial team won a $920 million jury verdict on trade secret claims, we obtained summary judgment for DuPont on antitrust counterclaims filed by Kolon, a leading Korean manufacturer, pertaining to alleged monopolization of para-aramid fiber (marketed by DuPont under the Kevlar® brand).
Corr Wireless Communications, L.L.C., et al. v. AT&T Inc., et al. We obtained a dismissal of all claims for our client, Motorola, in a significant lawsuit alleging multiple antitrust violations. The plaintiffs sought an injunction to stop defendants from selling their 4G-LTE chips, mobile devices, and wireless services, along with treble damages and attorneys' fees.
In re TFT-LCD (flat panel) antitrust litigation. We represented AT&T, Motorola, Target, Sears, Kmart, RadioShack, Newegg, JACO, Viewsonic, Rockwell, and CompUSA in lawsuits alleging that LCD manufacturers participated in an international price-fixing conspiracy that resulted in damages in the billions of dollars.
In Re Musical Instruments and Equipment Litigation. We represented Yamaha Corporation of America in litigation alleging that musical instrument manufacturers, retailers, and an industry trade organization conspired to raise the price of musical products and instruments. We recently obtained a dismissal with prejudice of all antitrust allegations.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.