Antitrust Lawyer

In re Plasma-Derivative Protein Therapies Antitrust Litigation

On April 8, 2010, Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP was appointed Co-Lead Counsel of the Steering Committee in In re Plasma-Derivative Protein Therapies Antitrust Litigation, C.A. No. 09-cv-07666 in the Northern District of Illinois, and successfully defeated a lengthy and substantial motion to dismiss in that case earlier this year. This is a complex, nationwide putative class action against manufacturers of plasma protein derivative therapies, which are proteins used to treat seriously ill patients across the United States. The action, filed on behalf of all direct purchasers of plasma-derivative protein therapies, alleges that plasma manufacturers agreed to restrict supply and therefore increase prices. On February 10, 2011, the Court denied the Defendants’ motions to dismiss. In deciding to appoint the firm to Co-Lead Counsel of the Steering Committee, the Court highlighted Shapiro Haber & Urmy's extensive experience litigating complex class actions and its ability to work cooperatively with co-counsel to effectively prosecute the case. Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC will serve as the other Co-Lead Counsel of the Steering Committee, and Freeborn & Peters will serve as Liaison Counsel. Charles Tompkins is one of the Co-Lead Counsel.

In re Polyurethane Foam Antitrust Litigation

Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP represents several of the nation’s largest bedding manufacturers and licensers as opt-out Plaintiffs in In re Polyurethane Foam Antitrust Litigation, C.A. No. 10-md-02196 in the Northern District of Ohio. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants and their co-conspirators contracted, combined or conspired to fix, raise, maintain and/or stabilize prices and allocate customers for polyurethane foam in the United States. One of the defendants has already admitted to its role in the price-fixing conspiracy and sought leniency from the Department of Justice. Charles Tompkins is one of the Co-Lead Counsel.

In re Marine Products Antitrust Litigation

On July 7, 2010, Judge Wu appointed Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP to serve as Vice Chair of the Executive Committee representing the class of direct purchasers in the case In re Marine Products Antitrust Litigation, C.A. No. 10-cv-2319 (C.D. Cal.) (continuing as Ace Marine Rigging & Supply, Inc. v. Virginia Harbor Services, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 11-cv-00436 (C.D. Cal) and Board of Commissions of the Port of New Orleans v. Virginia Harbor Services, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 11-cv-00437 (C.D. Cal)). Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP represents a class of direct purchasers of several products used in the marine industry to protect vessels, docks and piers. The class actions allege that manufacturers of these marine products collaborated to rig bids and divide the market in order to avoid competition and maximize profits. Settlements with certain defendants for more than $5 million and securing extensive cooperation with the continued prosecution of the case are currently pending approval. The case is being litigated before Judge Wu in the Central District of California, and Charles Tompkins is a member of the leadership team.

In re: Optical Disk Drive Products Antitrust Litigation

Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP represents a putative class of purchasers of products containing optical disc drives (such as CD and DVD drives), including computers, videogame consoles, and stand-alone external optical disc drives. The action alleges that Defendants and their co-conspirators fixed and maintained an artificial price at which optical disc drives were sold in the United States. The complaint further alleges that Defendants’ unlawful conduct resulted in Plaintiff and other Class members paying artificially inflated prices for optical disc drive products during the Class period. The case is entitled In re: Optical Disk Drive Products Antitrust Litigation, C.A. No. 10-md-2143 in the Northern District of California.

Liu v. AMERCO and U-Haul International, Inc.

Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP represents a putative class of purchasers of one-way truck rentals from U-Haul for transportation to, from or within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts between September 2006 and September 2008.  The action alleges that Defendants AMERCO and U-Haul International, Inc. engaged in an unlawful effort to conspire with their competitors regarding the price of one-way truck rentals.  The case is entitled Liu v. AMERCO, C.A. No. 10-cv-11221 in the District of Massachusetts, and is currently on appeal to the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Charles Tompkins serves as Lead Counsel.

In re: Musical Instruments and Equipment Antitrust Litigation

Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP represents a local musician and a putative class of musical instrument purchasers who allege that Guitar Center and other Defendants colluded on the price of certain musical instruments. The case is entitled In re: Musical Instruments and Equipment Antitrust Litigation, C.A. No. 09-md-02121 in the Southern District of California.

In re Refrigerant Compressors Antitrust Litigation

Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP represents putative classes of consumers in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, and Rhode Island who purchased refrigerant compressors, the cooling component in refrigeration units and air conditioners. The action alleges that the compressor manufacturers unlawfully agreed to fix and maintain the price of compressors, in violation of state law. Two of the defendants have entered guilty pleas to federal charges related to this conspiracy and have been sentenced to pay fines totaling over $140 million.  The case is entitled In re: Refrigerant Compressors Antitrust Litigation, C.A. No. 09-md-02042 in the Eastern District of Michigan.

Allen v. Dairy Farmers of America, Inc., et al.

Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP represents a certified settlement class of dairy farmers in the Northeastern United States who allege that Defendants unlawfully monopolized and fixed the prices that they paid the farmers for their milk and unlawfully allocated markets.  Defendants include Dairy Farmers of America, Inc., Dairy Marketing Services, LLC, and Dean Foods Company.  On August 3, 2011, the Court approved the settlement between Plaintiffs and Dean Foods Company that provides for $30 million in settlement funds. The case is entitled Allen v. Dairy Farmers of America, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 09-cv-230 in the District of Vermont.