Boston Antitrust Litigation Lawyer – Focused on Competition and Market Regulation
Antitrust Litigation
We litigate antitrust cases on behalf of individuals and businesses potentially harmed by anticompetitive conduct.
$2.67B
In 2020, Blue Cross Blue Shield settled for $2.67 billion in a class action antitrust lawsuit for conspiring to limit competition in the health insurance market.
1
Washington State Office of the Insurance Commissioner, “Blue Cross Blue Shield enrollees can expect payments from $2.67 billion settlement,” (Nov. 2, 2020).
$5.6B
In 2015, Citicorp, JPMorgan Chase, Barclays, UBS, and Royal Bank of Scotland paid $5.6 billion to settle charges of foreign exchange market manipulation.
2
U.S. Department of Justice, “Five Major
Banks Agree to Parent-Level Guilty Pleas,” (May 20, 2015).
Banks Agree to Parent-Level Guilty Pleas,” (May 20, 2015).
$6.2B
In 2018, Visa and Mastercard settled for $6.2 billion in a lawsuit over excessive card-swipe fees and antitrust violations.
3
Ken Sweet and Mae Anderson, “Visa, Mastercard settle long-running antitrust suit overswipe fees with merchants,” AP News (March 26, 2024).
$4.8B
In 2018, Google was fined approximately $4.8 billion by the European Commission for requiring Android manufacturers to pre-install Google apps to suppress competition.
4
European Commission, “Antitrust: Commission fines Google €4.34 billion for illegal practices regarding Android mobile devices to strengthen dominance of Google’s search engine,” AP News (March 26, 2024).
In May 2009, the European Commission fined Intel €1.06 billion for anticompetitive practices in the x86 CPU market between 2002 and 2007.
5
European Commission, “Commission imposes fine of €1.06 bn on Intel for abuse of dominant position,” Press release, May 13, 2009.
Antitrust law plays a vital role in preserving competitive markets. Our practice focuses on potential violations such as alleged price-fixing, market allocation, monopolization, and bid-rigging. We pursue appropriate remedies for clients who may have been harmed by anticompetitive conduct. By applying antitrust principles with care, we advocate for market conditions that benefit both consumers and businesses.
Our Massachusetts-based firm represents plaintiffs in antitrust matters under federal and state law. We assist individuals, businesses, and class representatives in navigating complex procedural and substantive requirements. Our work often includes detailed case evaluation, factual development, and collaboration with economic experts to assess competitive effects. Whether through negotiation or litigation, we aim to address anticompetitive harm and help restore competitive conditions that serve consumers, workers, and businesses alike.
Overview
Markets are supposed to reward innovation, efficiency, and merit. But when competition is suppressed—not by better products, but by secret pacts, dominant gatekeepers, and rigged access—entire industries suffer. Antitrust litigation exists to restore balance in a system where economic power too often concentrates through quiet coercion, not open rivalry.
The $74 billion Raytheon-United Technologies merger in 2020 was approved with required divestitures in military space and airborne radio markets to address antitrust concerns.
6
U.S. Department of Justice, “Justice Department Requires Divestitures in Merger Between UTC and Raytheon to Address Vertical and Horizontal Antitrust Concerns,” (Mar. 26, 2020).
Hidden Antitrust Harm
We confront the quiet architecture of anticompetitive control—structures that undermine choice, suppress wages, and inflate costs while remaining invisible to most consumers and investors. These aren’t edge-case violations. They’re embedded tactics: no-poach agreements disguised as industry norms, pricing algorithms that align without words, mergers that quietly eliminate the last remaining rival.
We represent clients who refuse to accept concentrated market power as an inevitability. Our work goes beyond formal violations—we examine structural conditions that allow anticompetitive practices to flourish. From collusion in public procurement to self-preferencing in digital platforms, we help plaintiffs challenge conduct that distorts markets and limits economic participation.
- Documented Market Distortion: In recent years, coordinated pricing in pharmaceuticals, exclusive tech platform arrangements, and anti-competitive mergers in defense and energy have shown how entire sectors can be reshaped through strategic dominance. These deals often pass unnoticed by consumers but create lasting damage for workers, small businesses, and communities.
- Beyond the Price Tag: Antitrust violations are not just about dollars—they affect who gets a job, what products come to market, and whether a new idea survives. When competition is crushed, innovation slows, and resilience disappears. The end user pays more, but the broader cost is democratic access to economic opportunity.
- Corrective Litigation: We don’t treat antitrust law as just a regulatory tool. We see it as a means of market repair. Our litigation strategies aim to produce measurable impact: financial recovery, structural change, and the deterrence of systemic abuse.
In an economy increasingly shaped by digital scale and platform control, the rules of fair competition are being rewritten—often without consent. Through targeted litigation and careful economic analysis, we help clients challenge that shift and reassert the foundational principle of open markets.
In January 2022, the FTC sued to block Lockheed Martin’s proposed $4.4 billion acquisition of Aerojet Rocketdyne, citing antitrust concerns over reduced competition in the missile propulsion market.
7
Federal Trade Commission, “FTC Sues to Block Lockheed Martin Corporation’s $4.4 Billion Vertical Acquisition of Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings Inc.,” (Jan. 25, 2022).
Your Rights
Antitrust violations can harm consumers, workers, entrepreneurs, and businesses in ways that are not always immediately visible—but the consequences are real. You may have legal options if you’ve experienced:
- Artificially elevated prices or fees for goods or services due to collusion, bid rigging, or coordinated price-fixing.
- Limited access to markets or customers because a dominant entity used its position to exclude competitors or manipulate conditions of entry.
- Wage suppression or career stagnation resulting from no-poach agreements, wage-fixing, or restrictions on worker mobility.
- Financial losses tied to a merger that reduced competition in your industry, supply chain, or geographic area.
- Barriers to innovation where a dominant firm’s conduct prevents smaller or emerging players from offering alternatives or disrupting entrenched markets.
Remedies may be available through private legal action under the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act, or Massachusetts Chapter 93A. In appropriate cases, these statutes allow for recovery of actual damages and, where authorized, multiple damages and attorneys’ fees. You may also be eligible to participate in a class action if the conduct affected a broad group in a similar way.
Whether you’re a consumer overcharged due to collusion, a business blocked from competing fairly, or an employee harmed by restricted job opportunities, antitrust law is designed to protect your right to participate in an open and competitive economy.
In 2018, the FTC approved Northrop Grumman’s $7.8 billion acquisition of Orbital ATK with conditions, requiring it to supply solid rocket motors to competitors to address antitrust concerns in aerospace and defense.
8
Federal Trade Commission, “FTC Imposes Conditions on Northrop Grumman’s Acquisition of Solid Rocket Motor Supplier Orbital ATK, Inc.,” (June 5, 2018).
Lawyers' Role
We offer strategic representation in complex antitrust matters.
- Market Analysis: Evaluate alleged anticompetitive conduct in coordination with economic experts and through detailed assessment of market dynamics.
- Strategic Advocacy: Represent businesses, individuals, and class members affected by practices such as price-fixing, market allocation, and exclusionary conduct.
- Procedural Insight: Assist clients throughout the legal process with clear guidance, informed strategy, and attention to procedural requirements.
- Courtroom Representation: Pursue claims in federal and state courts, applying antitrust statutes and common law principles where appropriate.
- Resolution Strategy: Facilitate negotiated outcomes that align with client objectives and applicable legal standards, with a focus on restoring fair competition.
How We Can Help
Digital Markets
Assess antitrust concerns involving algorithmic coordination, self-preferencing, exclusionary practices by dominant platforms, and market power derived from control of user data. We apply the Sherman Act and Massachusetts Chapter 93A to examine conduct that may hinder innovation, deter entry, or reduce consumer choice in technology markets.
Pharmaceutical Industry
Advise clients affected by potentially anticompetitive strategies such as pay-for-delay agreements, product hopping, or litigation tactics that may delay generic drug entry. These matters are evaluated under federal antitrust law, including the Hatch-Waxman framework, and applicable Massachusetts consumer protection statutes.
Labor Market Restrictions
Represent employees impacted by alleged no-poach agreements, overly broad non-competes, and wage-fixing arrangements that may suppress pay or limit job mobility. These cases may implicate the Sherman Act, Massachusetts Wage Act, and Chapter 93A, and reflect increased scrutiny by federal and state regulators.
Wage Suppression Claims
Analyze suspected collusion among employers aimed at capping wages, restricting advancement, or discouraging inter-firm hiring. We assess these matters using both antitrust and employment law frameworks to identify viable legal remedies.
Merger Effects
Review potential harm from consummated mergers or acquisitions that may substantially lessen competition. While pre-merger enforcement is typically led by government agencies, private parties may pursue relief under the Clayton Act when post-merger harm can be shown.
Price-Fixing & Market Allocation
Pursue claims involving coordination among competitors on pricing, customer division, or territorial allocation. Such conduct may constitute per se violations of the Sherman Act and, if proven, may entitle injured parties to treble damages and injunctive relief under federal and state law.
Supply Chain Constraints
Investigate exclusionary practices in distribution and procurement, including exclusive dealing, tying arrangements, resale price maintenance, and group boycotts. We focus on conduct that may raise rivals’ costs or reduce access to competitive markets.
Consumer Class Actions
Represent individuals and classes harmed by widespread anticompetitive conduct, including collusion, deceptive pricing, or monopolistic tactics. Under Chapter 93A, eligible claims may allow for multiple damages and attorney’s fees.
Environmental Markets
Address antitrust concerns in emerging sectors such as renewable energy, carbon trading, and sustainability services. We evaluate potential trade restraints and dominance-related conduct that may hinder fair access to environmental innovation.
Data Privacy and Competition
Assess how the accumulation or misuse of consumer data may entrench dominant market positions or create barriers to entry. We apply antitrust principles in tandem with privacy statutes, including the CCPA, GDPR, and Massachusetts Data Privacy Act.
Platform and E-Commerce Fairness
Examine exclusionary or discriminatory behavior by digital platforms, including self-preferencing, algorithmic bias, or retaliation against third-party sellers. We evaluate such conduct under the Sherman Act and Chapter 93A to promote competitive neutrality in online marketplaces.
