Antitrust

“Impressive litigation boutique, noted for its expert handling of complex, bet-the-company cases for leading corporate clients” (Chambers)

“Impressive litigation boutique, noted for its expert handling of complex, bet-the-company cases for leading corporate clients” (Chambers)

Wilkinson Stekloff has quickly become the go-to firm for clients who want to litigate antitrust cases with an eye toward trial rather than settlement.  We focus on developing a strategy for winning at trial to try to achieve positive results for our clients before trial.

We are one of the few firms in the country who has shown we can win antitrust cases in any setting—before judges or juries, against private plaintiffs or the government, and at every phase of litigation.  We have won bet-the-company, multi-billion-dollar antitrust cases on motions to dismiss and at summary judgment.  And we have taken some of the biggest antitrust cases in history to judgment and won, including the second-largest merger trial in American history and a $21 billion case for the NFL that sought to dismantle their highly successful media model.

Wilkinson Stekloff has received recognition across  the industry for our success, including Chambers and Partners ranking the firm in their “Nationwide Antitrust” category and four partners individually as “D.C. Antitrust Litigation Specialists,” Legal 500 ranking us in “Antitrust Civil Litigation Defense,” and both Global Competition Review and Benchmark Litigation awarding Matter of the Year to our work successfully defending Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard.

Wilkinson Stekloff has quickly become the go-to firm for clients who want to litigate antitrust cases with an eye toward trial rather than settlement.  We have had success in a number of high-profile, bet-the-company antitrust cases, focusing on developing a strategy for winning at trial that has delivered positive results for our clients before trial.  We represent clients in civil and criminal matters, in courts and in agency proceedings.

Among our many representative matters, described further below, was prevailing in the second-largest merger trial in American history and an outright win on summary judgment that was selected as one of the “Impact Cases” of the year by Benchmark Litigation.

Image
“Impressive litigation boutique, noted for its expert handling of complex, bet-the-company cases for leading corporate clients” (Chambers)

Representative Matters

  • In re National Football League’s Sunday Ticket Antitrust Litigation.  Obtained a complete victory for the NFL and its 32 member teams in a class action lawsuit challenging the distribution of the Sunday Ticket subscription package and the NFL’s overall media strategy.  Plaintiffs sought over $21 billion in damages post-trebling as well as injunctive relief that would undermine the NFL’s entire broadcast model. The Wilkinson Stekloff team served as lead counsel throughout the nine-year litigation and ultimately obtained judgment as a matter of law after trial. Relying on the Wilkinson Stekloff team’s cross-examinations of Plaintiffs’ experts and post-trial briefs, Judge Gutierrez excluded the testimony of Plaintiffs’ key expert witnesses as unreliable, resulting in a complete victory for the NFL. The American Lawyer and Law360 recognized the firm as “Litigators of the Week” and “Legal Lions,” their respective weekly features, for this significant victory.
  • Federal Trade Commission v. Microsoft Corporation, et al. Secured a groundbreaking victory for Microsoft in the second-largest merger trial in American history and the biggest involving a technology company over its $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard.  Defeated the FTC’s request for a preliminary injunction to stop the transaction after a five-day trial that began less than four weeks after the FTC filed its federal court complaint.  Directed all aspects of litigation strategy from the time the acquisition was announced in January 2022, positioning the case for a federal court victory on an unprecedented timeline.  The Ninth Circuit later unanimously affirmed the district court’s decision, and the FTC dismissed its Part 3 administrative complaint.  The firm was recognized in the American Lawyer’s “Litigator of the Week” feature for the trial victory and received a “Shout-out” for the appellate win, which also earned Law360’s “Legal Lions of the Week.”  The deal was named “Matter of the Year” by Global Competition Review and won “Impact Case of the Year” from Benchmark Litigation.
  • In the Matter of Altria Group, Inc. and JUUL Labs, Inc. Secured an unprecedented FTC dismissal on behalf of Altria following an administrative trial before the FTC over Altria’s minority investment in JUUL Labs.  The Chief Administrative Law Judge dismissed the claims in their entirety claims, finding that FTC complaint counsel had failed to prove that Altria and JUUL violated antitrust laws.  The FTC subsequently dismissed the proceeding as no longer in the public interest.  Currently serves as lead counsel for Altria in in a series of putative class-action lawsuits brought in the Northern District of California by direct purchasers, indirect purchasers, and indirect resellers raising the same allegations as the FTC.
  • In re College Athlete NIL Litigation. Negotiated a groundbreaking settlement to a series of antitrust class-action lawsuits brought by hundreds of thousands of current and former student-athletes under the Sherman Act against the NCAA and the Autonomy Five collegiate athletic conferences. Plaintiffs challenged NCAA rules limiting student-athlete compensation and benefits, including rules related to name, image, and likeness (“NIL”), and prohibiting professional-style revenue sharing. The settlement is expected to bring “antitrust peace” for the NCAA for the next decade through several innovative legal mechanisms and release all past damages claims for a fraction of the damages Plaintiffs ultimately could claim.
  • Chalmers, et al. v. NCAA, et al. Won dismissal of all claims in an antirust matter filed against the NCAA and six major athletic conferences, seeking damages for the purported misuse of former student-athletes’ NIL on behalf of a sprawling nationwide class dating back more than 40 years. Wilkinson Stekloff represented the NCAA and led the joint defense group, including directing the motion to dismiss briefing and arguing for dismissal before the court.  In recognition of this victory, Law360 named the team “Legal Lions of the Week”, and the American Lawyer gave a the firm a “Shout Out” in its Litigators of the Week feature.  The case is currently on appeal.
  • In re Cattle and Beef Antitrust Litigation. Represents Cargill in multidistrict litigation concerning the cattle and beef industries in the United States.  The MDL includes six putative classes of Plaintiffs, as well as direct action, opt-out lawsuits by dozens of companies.  The various complaints allege violations of the Sherman Act, the Packers and Stockyards Act, and the Commodity Exchange Act, and dozens of state antitrust and consumer protection laws.  Plaintiffs’ antitrust claims allege that the country’s four largest beef packers have colluded to limit slaughter capacity, thus increasing beef prices, the margins those packers earn on beef sales, and the prices of live cattle futures and options contracts.  Wilkinson Stekloff serves as lead counsel for Cargill.
  • Kleen Products LLC, et al. v. International Paper, et al. Won summary judgment for Georgia-Pacific LLC (“GP”) in this antitrust class action involving claimed damages of over $10 billion. The win, which was affirmed unanimously on appeal, came just weeks after other defendants had agreed to pay over $350 million in settlement.  Benchmark Litigation named the summary judgment ruling one of its “National Impact Cases” of the year, and the American Lawyer gave the team a “Shout Out” for the win, highlighting the favorable result as “why you hire Beth Wilkinson.”  On appeal, the Seventh Circuit unanimously affirmed the district court’s decision.
  • In re Valve Antitrust Litigation. Serves as lead litigation and trial counsel for Valve Corporation, a videogame developer, publisher, and digital distribution company, defending against claims of anticompetitive practices surrounding their industry-leading PC gaming platform called Steam.
  • United States v. Visa Inc. Represents Visa in connection with the complaint filed by the Department of Justice challenging practices of Visa’s market-leading debit network.  The government’s complaint alleges violations of the Sherman Act, including market monopolization, unlawful agreements not to compete, and unlawful agreements that restrain trade.
  • In re National Collegiate Athletic Association Athletic Grant-In-Aid Cap Antitrust Litigation. Served as lead counsel for the NCAA at summary judgment and trial in a challenge by certain current and former NCAA college football and basketball student athletes to NCAA rules limiting the level of athletics-based financial aid benefits that student athletes may receive.  Plaintiffs set out to fundamentally change college athletics in America by attacking their defining characteristic – that student athletes are amateurs – making this one of the most important cases in the NCAA’s history.  After a three-week bench trial, the district court enjoined certain limitations on benefits that student-athletes may receive, but reaffirmed the procompetitive value of the NCAA’s rules and rejected Plaintiffs’ broader-ranging efforts to transform college athletics.
  • United States v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals USA. Defended generic pharmaceutical manufacturer Glenmark against criminal antitrust charges brought by the U.S. Department of Justice.  Nearly three years after indictment, the case resolved with a deferred prosecution agreement and no conviction.
  • In re Namenda Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litigation. Served as lead counsel for Forest Laboratories and Actavis (now Allergan) in a certified antitrust class action in the Southern District of New York involving a groundbreaking treatment for dementia in Alzheimer’s patients.  Plaintiffs claimed that Forest made an anticompetitive “reverse payment” to settle a generic drug manufacturer’s challenge to Namenda, and that Forest unlawfully tried to effectuate a “hard switch” between a twice-daily and once-daily version of Namenda.  Plaintiffs claimed approximately $21 billion in trebled damages; the case settled the night before trial for less than 5% of that amount.