Plaintiffs
In re Air Cargo Shipping Services Antitrust Litigation: As Court-appointed Co-Lead Counsel, Robins Kaplan represented businesses that purchased airfreight services directly from defendants, many of the world’s largest airlines. In a case referred to by the court as “irrefutably complex,” plaintiffs alleged that defendants participated in a global conspiracy to unlawfully inflate the prices charged to ship goods by air transportation between January 1, 2000 and September 30, 2006. The plaintiffs’ cumulative recoveries in decade-long litigation surpassed $1.2 billion.
In re Automotive Parts Antitrust Litigation: Robins Kaplan serves as Court-appointed Co-Lead Counsel on behalf of proposed classes of businesses and consumers who purchased or leased new vehicles containing various price-fixed automotive parts. In this unprecedented multidistrict litigation, which to date encompasses 41 coordinated actions against more than 160 different defendants, plaintiffs allege that defendants participated in massive and prolonged conspiracies to fix the prices charged for dozens of automotive parts. Plaintiffs further allege that as a result of the defendants’ bid-rigging conspiracies, prices were inflated for these new vehicles. These cases arose out of what has been described as the largest United States Department of Justice antitrust-cartel investigation in history. Partial settlements to date in the case have now surpassed $1 billion.
In re Cathode Ray Tube Antitrust Litigation: Robins Kaplan brought an action on behalf of Best Buy alleging that numerous electronics manufacturers, including Toshiba, Panasonic, Mitsubishi, and LG, participated in a conspiracy to fix the prices of cathode ray tubes (CRTs), which were once integral components of televisions and computer monitors. Our client and other plaintiffs claim that the defendants artificially increased prices for CRTs between 1997 and 2007 by dividing the market and restricting supply. The case concluded with settlements exceeding $300 million and a $22.5 million jury verdict against one defendant.
In re Kirk Dahl, et al. v. Bain Capital Partners, LLC, et al.: Robins Kaplan represented public shareholders of companies that were taken private in leveraged buyout transactions in a class action against defendants that allegedly conspired to suppress the acquisition prices of the target companies. The defendants were the among the largest private equity firms. Settlements in the case ultimately reached nearly $600 million.
In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Litigation, 05-MD-1720 (MKB)(JO): Robins Kaplan, serving as plaintiffs’ co-lead counsel, recently reached a $6.25 billion antitrust settlement on behalf of a class of over 10 million U.S. merchants who have accepted Visa and Mastercard credit cards and debit cards for the purchase of goods and services. The defendants include Visa and Mastercard, as well as major card-issuing banks such as JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo, and Capital One. The settlement, which is subject to possible reduction of up to $700 million in the event opt-outs exceed a certain threshold, is believed to be the largest-ever antitrust class action settlement. The settlement was filed with the District Court on a request for preliminary approval on September 18, 2018.
State of Minnesota and Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Minnesota v. Philip Morris Inc. et al.: Robins Kaplan represented the State of Minnesota and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Minnesota in a groundbreaking antitrust and consumer fraud lawsuit against cigarette manufacturers. Robins Kaplan secured a historic multi-billion-dollar settlement after 15 weeks of trial that made it, in the words of Law360, “the vanguard firm in the first successful battle with Big Tobacco.” The landmark result in this case led to domino-like settlements between the tobacco industry and 45 other states.
In re TFT-LCD (Flat-Panel) Antitrust Litigation: Robins Kaplan represented Best Buy in one of the largest nationwide antitrust actions in the country, alleging that a cartel of major international manufacturers fixed the prices of LCD displays used in computer monitors, laptops, televisions, cell phones, and other products. Our client successfully recovered settlements in excess of $400 million, and was also awarded a $7.5 million verdict after a 7-week-jury trial.
In re Vitamins Antitrust Litigation: Robins Kaplan represented large agribusiness clients, including Land O’ Lakes, Inc., Hormel Foods Corporation, CHS Co-Operatives, and Gold’n Plump Poultry, in In re Vitamins Antitrust Litigation. The Vitamins litigation arose out of a decade-long price-fixing cartel of the major international vitamin manufacturers, and involved vigorously contested disputes regarding jurisdiction, foreign discovery, conspiracy, damages and expert issues. The cases settled after discovery was complete, but before trial, for more than $250 million.
Defense
Aguilar, et al. v. Atlantic Richfield, et al.: Robins Kaplan represented a petroleum company in a state law antitrust class action alleging an unlawful conspiracy to restrict the output and raise the price of a new formulation of gasoline. On appeal, summary judgment was granted for defendants by the California Court of Appeals. The decision was subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court of California.
Augustine Medical, Inc. v. Mallinckrodt, Inc., et al.: Robins Kaplan represented a medical device inventor against monopolization and Walker Process fraud counterclaims in a patent infringement suit. The antitrust counterclaims were dismissed after summary judgment was granted in favor of the plaintiff.
Bristol Hotel Management Corp., et al. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company, et al.: Robins Kaplan represented an insurance company in a class action suit alleging a conspiracy to charge illegally high prices for workers’ compensation policies in Florida. The court granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss as to the federal claims under the McCarran-Ferguson Act and similarly dismissed plaintiffs’ state law claims.
Digital Sun v. The Toro Company: Robins Kaplan obtained dismissal and successful resolution of antitrust, California unfair business practices, and common law fraud claims against The Toro Company. The complaint involved smart sprinkler technology and arose out of Toro's consideration of a potential business relationship, including licensing. The issues presented in the motion to dismiss included the plausibility of the allegations under the standard set forth in the Supreme Court's decision in Twombly, as well as the intersection between antitrust and patent laws.
Insulate SB, Inc. v. Advanced Finishing Products & Equipment, et al.: Robins Kaplan represented Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota Inc. in the defense of an antitrust class action lawsuit in which Graco was alleged to have violated federal and state antitrust laws by purchasing certain rivals, and then allegedly orchestrating various conspiracies with its distributors of fast-set spray foam equipment. Plaintiff’s lawsuit followed a voluntary consent decree between Graco and the FTC relating to the acquisitions and certain of its business practices in the alleged fast-set spray foam equipment market. After successfully moving to transfer the case from Pennsylvania to Minnesota federal court, the firm obtained a complete dismissal, with prejudice, of the claims brought against its client. In 2015, the Firm persuaded the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to affirm the dismissal in its entirety, and defeated a petition for rehearing en banc.
Omnicare, Inc. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc.: Robins Kaplan represented defendants UnitedHealth Group, Inc. and PacifiCare, Inc. in an antitrust lawsuit involving alleged price-fixing and fraud related to prescription drug reimbursement under the federal Medicare Part D program. Plaintiff Omnicare sought damages exceeding $1 billion and permanent injunctive relief. Summary judgment was granted to defendants on all claims, which was later affirmed by the 7th Circuit. This case has been recognized as the leading authority on liability under Section 1 of the Sherman Act for “gun jumping” the regulatory approval of a merger.
Raymond, et al. v. TCI, et al.: Robins Kaplan defended a media company against class action antitrust allegations of tying and unfair competition in the market for cable television services in Florida. The case was resolved to the benefit of all parties.
In re Union Oil Company of California: Robins Kaplan successfully defended Section 5 antitrust allegations by the Federal Trade Commission against UNOCAL based on standard-setting theory for reformulated gasoline patents. The case involved the complex intersection of antitrust and patent laws.
In re Wholesale Grocery Products Antitrust Litigation: Robins Kaplan defended grocery wholesaler Supervalu Inc. in a putative antitrust class action by grocery retailers in 13 states alleging that Supervalu and another wholesaler, C&S Wholesale Grocers, Inc., conspired to allocate territories and customers in the Midwest and New England in violation of the Sherman Act. This significant multidistrict litigation began in 2008 and involved five separate Eighth Circuit appeals and a petition for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court. The case was ultimately resolved to the benefit of all parties.