CLASS ACTION QUICK FACTS

Attorneys who have held senior positions at federal agencies, including:

    Department of Justice

    Federal Trade Commission

    Securities and Exchange Commission

    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

    Department of Labor

    Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
 

HONORS AND AWARDS

Ranked in 2016 U.S. News-Best Lawyers "Best Law Firms"

    Tier 1 Mass Torts Litigation / Class Actions - Defendants (National)

    Tier 1 Mass Torts Litigation / Class Actions - Defendants (Baltimore)

 

Antitrust Class Action Defense



Antitrust class action battles demand a sophisticated combination of litigation, regulatory, antitrust and industry prowess from a deep-benched team that knows the venue.  Venable is one of a very few elite firms capable of putting these talents into action as a team in pursuit of successful outcomes.

Antitrust class actions are typically triggered by government antitrust enforcement developments, and often challenge industry association and other collective conduct framed by pharmaceutical patent litigation settlements, standard-setting, information exchanges, mergers, patent licensing, group purchasing and regulatory, legislative and judicial petitioning or compliance activities.  Venable’s top-ranked regulatory and trade association practices guide our litigation strategies in these battles and provide experienced class action litigators with unique insights and critical pathways. 

Our highly decorated white collar criminal defense, franchise and distribution, intellectual property, consumer protection and international trade practices are substantive disciplines that distinguish Venable’s antitrust class action capabilities from those of other leading firms.  Our wealth of experience extends into a number of industries where we have been litigating and counseling clients for decades:  financial services, pharmaceuticals, health care, hospitality, new media, and hundreds of trade associations.  We also represent clients responding to parallel investigations by state and federal enforcement agencies, and pursuing or defending opt-out litigation in connection with pending antitrust class actions.

Venable’s deep experience in specialized practice areas, industry know-how, and nationwide platform are powerful tools in the hands of our leading trial lawyers, many of whom are former   assistant U.S. attorneys and government agency enforcement professionals.

Our strategies and tactics are informed by our clients’ business goals and needs, our knowledge of the courts and antitrust bar, and a practiced ear for the many judgment calls contributing to success. Our trial attorneys have successfully resolved – by trial, dispositive motion or creative settlement – thousands of class actions in all of the prominent state and federal class action venues across the nation. 

REPRESENTATIVE MATTERS

  • Venable secured a summary judgment victory on horizontal conspiracy claims for client Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. in major "reverse payment" case. This marked one of the first cases to reach the summary judgment stage after the Supreme Court’s recent decision in FTC v. Actavis, 133 S. Ct. 2223 (2013).
  • Venable represented a sleep products trade association in connection with a multi-district litigation civil antitrust class action alleging output restrictions and price fixing in the polyurethane foam market.  
  • We represented a pharmaceutical trade association defending multi-district-litigation (MDL) Section 1 claims alleging price and output restrictions arising from data collection and reporting activities on behalf of a putative class of hospital and other health service providers.
  • Venable represented a group of domestic steel companies in a putative class action alleging horizontal price fixing by Chinese producers of manganese.
  • We are currently defending a generic pharmaceutical manufacturer in a MDL civil antitrust class action asserting Section 1 claims arising from a Hatch-Waxman settlement of pharmaceutical patent litigation.
  • Venable represented a transportation company in 2011-2013 and resolved class member and opt-out claims in MDL litigation arising out of a criminal prosecution of price fixing and related conduct in that particular transportation industry.