Antitrust Litigation
We litigate antitrust cases to recover compensation for individuals and businesses harmed by anticompetitive practices.
$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).
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).
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,” (July 18, 2018).
“Antitrust: Commission fines Google
€4.34 billion for illegal practices
regarding Android mobile devices to
strengthen dominance of Google’s
search engine,” (July 18, 2018).
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.
imposes fine of €1.06 bn on Intel for
abuse of dominant position,” Press
release, May 13, 2009.
Antitrust litigation is essential for maintaining competitive markets. Our team addresses issues including price-fixing, market allocation, monopolistic practices, and bid-rigging. We are committed to holding violators accountable and seeking remedies for clients affected by anti-competitive conduct. By challenging practices that restrict competition, we aim to protect consumer and business interests and promote market fairness.
Our Massachusetts-based firm represents plaintiffs in antitrust matters at state and federal levels. We assist individuals, businesses, and class action groups in navigating antitrust laws and procedures. Our work includes case evaluation, evidence collection, and collaboration with economic experts to build strong arguments. Through negotiation or litigation, we seek fair compensation while working toward market reforms that benefit consumers and businesses.
Overview
Our attorneys handle complex antitrust cases, focusing on holding companies accountable for practices that harm competition. We pursue remedies for clients affected by anti-competitive conduct to restore fairness in the marketplace.
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).
Department Requires Divestitures in Merger
Between UTC and Raytheon to Address
Vertical and Horizontal Antitrust Concerns,”
(Mar. 26, 2020).
Antitrust Litigation
We represent clients in significant cases that address corporate misconduct and promote market fairness. Our focus includes:
- Price Fixing & Overpricing: Pursue cases where companies conspire to raise prices, helping clients recover financial losses from inflated costs.
- Monopolistic Practices: Challenge dominant firms that abuse market power, helping secure damages and compensation competitive balance.
- Unfair Mergers & Acquisitions: Litigate against harmful mergers to block deals and achieve financial remedies.
- Predatory Pricing: Help plaintiffs recover losses from businesses that undercut competitors and later inflate prices.
- Bid Rigging & Market Allocation: Address collusion to manipulate bids or market divisions.
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).
to Block Lockheed Martin Corporation’s
$4.4 Billion Vertical Acquisition of Aerojet
Rocketdyne Holdings Inc.,” (Jan. 25, 2022).
Your Rights
As a consumer or business affected by anti-competitive practices, you have the right to seek compensation and fair market conditions. We can help you:
- Challenge price-fixing schemes, bid-rigging, and market allocation agreements that artificially inflate prices and restrict competition.
- Combat monopolistic practices, including predatory pricing, exclusive dealing, and tying arrangements that limit market access and consumer choice.
- Contest unlawful mergers and acquisitions that consolidate market power and reduce competition in key industries.
- Recover financial compensation for economic losses due to anti-competitive behavior, potentially including punitive damages to hold wrongdoers accountable and deter future misconduct.
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).
Conditions on Northrop Grumman’s
Acquisition of Solid Rocket Motor Supplier
Orbital ATK, Inc.,” (June 5, 2018).
Lawyers' Role
Our team helps recover just compensation for those harmed by illegal anticompetitive practices. We:
- Investigate potential violations, collaborating with economic experts and industry analysts to build strong cases.
- Represent consumers and businesses harmed by anti-competitive practices, including price-fixing, market allocation, and monopolistic behavior.
- Guide you through every step of the legal process, from initial consultation to final resolution, so you understand your rights and options.
- Litigate complex antitrust cases in federal and state courts, using our experience to have a decisive effect.
- Negotiate settlements, always aiming to secure the best possible outcome for our clients.
How We Can Help
Price-Fixing & Overpricing
Cases involving price-fixing conspiracies under the Sherman Act are pursued to seek treble damages, injunctive relief, and compensation for inflated costs.
Bid-Rigging & Market Allocation
Bid-rigging and market allocation schemes are challenged under antitrust laws to recover damages and obtain court orders preventing future violations.
Group Boycotts
Group boycotts that exclude businesses from markets are litigated under the Sherman Act to secure damages and injunctive relief for affected parties.
Monopolistic Practices & Abuse of Market Power
Claims against dominant firms engaging in predatory pricing, exclusive dealing, or tying arrangements are litigated to restore competition and pursue damages.
Tying Arrangements
Litigation against tying arrangements under the Sherman and Clayton Acts addresses restricted consumer choice and seeks damages and injunctive relief.
Exclusive Dealing & Resale Price Maintenance
Cases involving exclusive dealing or resale price maintenance practices are evaluated under the rule of reason to address anti-competitive effects and recover losses.
Price Discrimination (Robinson-Patman Act)
Unfair pricing practices by dominant firms that harm smaller competitors are challenged to recover treble damages and prevent market abuses.
Pharmaceutical Antitrust Violations
Anti-competitive practices like pay-for-delay and product hopping in the pharmaceutical sector are challenged to secure damages and promote access to affordable medications.
Digital Market Abuses
Claims involving algorithmic price-fixing, platform bias, and data monopolies are pursued to address unfair digital market practices and restore fair competition.
Supply Chain Manipulation
Anti-competitive practices in supply chains, such as restricting access to essential materials or services, are challenged to restore fair market practices and recover damages.
False Advertising with Anti-Competitive Impact
Claims are pursued against deceptive advertising practices that harm market competition and mislead consumers, seeking damages and equitable remedies.
Unlawful Mergers & Acquisitions
Anti-competitive mergers and acquisitions are assessed and opposed under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act and Sherman Act to protect market competition and secure remedies.
Civil Penalties & Disgorgement of Profits
Civil penalties and disgorgement of profits are sought to ensure wrongdoers do not benefit from anti-competitive practices.
Class Actions & State Antitrust Claims
Class actions and claims under Chapter 93A in Massachusetts are pursued to maximize recovery for consumers and businesses harmed by anti-competitive conduct.
No-Poach Agreements
Cases involving no-poach agreements that limit worker mobility are litigated under evolving antitrust laws to restore competition and recover damages.
