Antitrust Investigations & Litigation

US Criminal and Civil Investigations

• Persuaded the DOJ Antitrust Division to abandon the largest monopoly investigation in the history of the electric power industry. After more than two years of investigation and review of millions of documents, the DOJ readied to bring a landmark monopolization case challenging our client utility’s generation procurement and transmission planning practices, and threatening divestiture. After Steptoe presented the client’s factual and economic case to Antitrust Division management, DOJ elected not to go forward.
• Secured a victory for Georgetown Day School (GDS), in connection with a US Department of Justice Antitrust Division investigation of eight DC-area private schools. The schools were alleged to have collectively agreed to stop offering Advanced Placement classes by 2022, in violation of the Sherman Act. After a two-and-a-half year investigation, culminating in the submission of an extensive white paper addressing the legal and factual problems with the allegations, the Antitrust Division announced its decision to decline to bring an enforcement action against GDS and the other schools.
• Represented a company CEO and multiple sales executives in relation to civil cases and a criminal investigation for alleged price-fixing conspiracy by poultry processing companies regarding the prices of broiler chickens.
• Counsel to multiple clients, including an amnesty applicant, in connection with DOJ Antitrust Division’s investigations into the auto parts industry. Steptoe conducted an internal investigation, prepared witnesses for on-the-record proffer interviews by government investigators, and negotiated final resolutions in both the criminal matter and follow-on class action and opt-out litigation.
• Represented a national service provider in investigation by attorneys general of New York, Florida, and Ohio into allegations of coordination with competitors relating to contracting practices, resulting in no action taken.

Antitrust Litigation

• Won dismissal on summary judgment of antitrust and unfair competition claims seeking $900 million in damages for attempted monopolization of wholesale power in the Carolinas brought against Duke Energy Corp.
• Obtained dismissal of a multi-district litigation encompassing more than a dozen antitrust actions brought by putative classes of students and off-campus booksellers alleging an unlawful conspiracy among publishers and on-campus bookstore operators to fix prices and eliminate competition in the market for higher education course materials.
• Won summary judgment for Aquestive, an upstream supplier to a pharmaceutical company, in US federal litigation regarding antitrust conspiracy and product-hopping allegations brought by 42 state attorneys general. Our summary judgment motions raised unique issues concerning whether a supplier of innovative technology to a pharmaceutical manufacturer may be held liable as a co-conspirator in the drug company’s efforts to engage in lifecycle management for its products.
• Represented Cellular South, the largest privately held US wireless telephone company, in an antitrust suit to block the proposed merger of AT&T and T-Mobile. This high-profile lawsuit followed complaints filed by the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division, seven states, and Sprint Nextel. After participating in DOJ’s investigation of the merger, Cellular South decided its concerns as a regional carrier were different and needed to be heard separately from those raised by the DOJ and Sprint Nextel. The proposed merger was eventually abandoned before trial.
• Successfully defended LG Chem in follow-on litigation initiated by Microsoft Mobile Oy in the UK High Court.
• Defended Korean food manufacturer Yakult in a class action alleging price-fixing of products made in Korea and sold in the US. Obtained the only complete dismissal of for any defendant in the action, which continued against other against defendants.
• Defended National Milk Producers Federation, a federation of US dairy cooperatives, in several direct and indirect civil class actions under federal and state law. The claims sought damages allegedly caused by a long-running federation program relating to supplies of raw milk linked to some $9.5 billion worth of higher payments to dairy farmers. The cases raised fundamental yet rarely addressed questions of the scope of statutory exemptions from antitrust laws for agricultural cooperatives. These matters each settled for a small fraction of the alleged damages.
• Defending Japan Airlines International Co., Ltd. (JAL) against ground-breaking civil damages claims in London relating to an alleged worldwide air cargo conspiracy. This follows successful defenses of JAL in the US class actions In re Air Cargo Shipping Services Antitrust Litigation and In re Transpacific Passenger Air Transportation, which both settled favorably after motions to dismiss.
• Represented Amadeus as a defendant against claims alleging conspiracy among three global distribution systems to impose substantially similar terms to distribute airline tickets. The case involved complex regulatory questions and developments in high-technology markets, and was settled on favorable terms.
• Represented Mitsubishi Heavy Industries in bringing antitrust claims against General Electric for abusive uses of patents relating to turbines for wind power generators. The suit was part of a complicated series of lawsuits and counter-suits between the two industrial giants, ultimately resolved by settlement of the various intellectual property, antitrust, and other claims.
• On behalf of Arizona Public Service Company, persuaded the DOJ Antitrust Division to challenge the proposed Energy Solutions-WCS merger that would have reduced competition in processing of nuclear waste and assisted DOJ at the successful trial that blocked the transaction.
• Defended Republic Services in two cases, one filed in Louisiana and one in the Northern District of California, alleging violation of the state Unfair Trade Practices Acts.
• Defended Crestron Electronics, Inc. in antitrust litigation in US District Court for the District of Massachusetts in an antitrust lawsuit brought by a competitor for alleged exclusive dealing and exclusionary conduct relating to home automation and control products. Also represented Crestron in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey in related antitrust and business tort litigation with a former distributor. Succeeded in the New Jersey matter in securing dismissal with prejudice of all antitrust counterclaims and a settlement requiring payment from the distributor and an agreement that the distributor take specified remedial actions.