Antitrust

Antitrust Violations

Price Fixing

Discriminatory Pricing

Forming Cartels

Antitrust violations such as these prevent lawful competition and result in higher prices and less choice for consumers and businesses. A market economy works best when every business has the opportunity to compete freely and fairly.

Antitrust

Spector Partners has played a prominent role in prosecuting many significant antitrust class actions.

For example, it led the In re Linerboard Antitrust Litigation (E.D. Pa.) action, which settled for $202 million – the largest ever antitrust settlement in the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals. The Firm served as lead counsel in the In re OSB Antitrust Litigation (E.D. Pa.), where a class of direct purchasers of OSB structural panels used in building homes was certified, and where our complaint was one of the first in the nation to survive challenge under the Supreme Court decision in U.S. v. Twombly. The case settled for $120 million. Spector is currently lead counsel in the In re Blood Reagents Antitrust Litigation, where the two dominant manufacturers of blood reagents are alleged to have fixed the prices of these tremendously important products

Other prominent antitrust cases the Firm has led include In re Flat Glass Antitrust Litigation (W.D. Pa.), which settled for $120 million; In re Relafen Antitrust Litigation (D. Mass.), which settled for $75 million to end-payors; Stop and Shop Supermarket Co. v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. (E.D. Pa.), which settled for $100 million; In re Tricor Indirect Purchasers Antitrust Litigation which settled for $62.5 million to the end-payor class and additional monies to opt-out insurers; and In re Mercedes-Benz Antitrust Litigation (D.N.J.), which settled for $17.5 million.

Further, Spector worked on behalf of businesses overcharged due to an illegal cartel among manufacturers of bulk vitamins and helped recover over $1 billion. We worked for end-payors in the In re Buspirone Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.), which settled as to all claims by purchasers, state attorneys general, and the Federal Trade Commission, for $670 million. We also worked on behalf of direct purchasers of dynamic random access memory chips, used in computers, in the In re DRAM Antitrust Litigation, MDL Docket 1486 (N.D. Cal.), which settled for more than $325 million.

Antitrust Class Action Cases

In re Automotive Parts Antitrust Litigation MDL 2311 (E.D. Mich.).

Spector has been appointed Interim Co-Lead Counsel for Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs for all product cases filed in In re Automotive Parts Antitrust Litigation (MDL. No. 2311). These massive price-fixing class actions are being brought on behalf of direct purchasers who were overcharged for various kinds of automotive parts, including wire harness products, heater control panels, instrument panel clusters, fuel senders, occupant safety restraint system products, bearings, air conditioning systems, starters, windshield wiper systems and windshield washer systems. All cases are pending before Judge Marianne Battani in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan in Detroit. SRK and its Interim Co-Lead Counsel on behalf of the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs have defeated motions to dismiss filed to date in all product cases.

Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs have reached settlements with three defendants totaling approximately $50 million.

The U.S. Department of Justice, the Japan Fair Trade Commission and the European Commission continue to investigate the Automotive Parts industry, and criminal fines levied total $2.4 billion to date, with thirty-two companies and twenty-nine executives having pleaded guilty or having agreed to plead guilty in the United States. A Department of Justice spokesperson recently told the Automotive News that “[i]n terms of the breadth of the investigation and the scope of the commerce involved, there’s certainly nothing on the record that parallels this.” As Judge Battani stated in her April 30, 2014 Order and Opinion denying the defendants’ motion to dismiss in the fuel senders case, “In re: Automotive Parts Antitrust Litigation arises out of the largest investigation into antitrust violations ever undertaken by the Department of Justice. The number of guilty pleas that have been entered in this multi-district litigation suggest the anticompetitive conduct was business as usual, not the work of a rogue employee.”

In re OSB Antitrust Litigation Case No. 06-826 (E.D. Pa.)

Spector was Lead Counsel for a certified class of purchasers of oriented strand board (“OSB”), which is a structural panel used in the construction of residential houses, specifically for floors, roofs and walls. Spector alleged that the defendants, nine billion-dollar OSB manufacturers, violated federal antitrust law by conspiring to reduce the supply of OSB in the market, in order to raise and fix OSB prices. In August 2007, U.S. District Court Judge Paul Diamond (E.D. Pa.) certified the class and denied defendants’ motions to dismiss for the second time; our complaint was one of the first in the nation to survive a challenge under U.S. v. Twombly. On the eve of trial, Spector settled the case on behalf of the class for more than $120 million.

In re Linerboard Antitrust Litigation MDL 1261 (E.D. Pa.)

Spector served as Co-Lead Counsel for a certified class of purchasers of corrugated sheets, which are used to make cardboard boxes. Spector alleged that the defendants, all billion-dollar linerboard manufacturers, violated federal antitrust law by conspiring to reduce the supply of linerboard in the market, in order to raise and fix the prices of corrugated sheets and boxes, which are made from linerboard. U.S. District Court Judge Jan DuBois (E.D. Pa.) certified the class and the Third Circuit affirmed that decision in a landmark opinion. The case settled for $202 million – the largest-ever antitrust settlement in the Third Circuit.

In re Flat Glass Antitrust Litigation MDL 1200 (W.D. Pa.)

Spector served as Co-Lead Counsel for a certified class of purchasers of flat glass products, primarily used in the manufacture of automobiles. Spector alleged that the defendants, all billion-dollar flat glass manufacturers, violated federal antitrust law by conspiring to raise and fix the prices of flat glass products. U.S. District Judge Ziegler (W.D. Pa.) certified the class. The Third Circuit later overruled the District Court, which had ruled in defendants’ favor on summary judgment, in a landmark opinion. The case settled on the eve of trial with the last defendant for a total of $120 million.

View All