Gustafson Gluek PLLC is devoted to the prosecution of antitrust violations. We have litigated antitrust cases in federal and state courts across the United States.
Federal and state antitrust laws are designed to protect and promote competition among businesses by prohibiting price fixing and other forms of anticompetitive conduct. Violations can range from straight forward agreements among competitors to raise prices above competitive prices to complicated schemes that affect relationships between different levels of a market.
Ongoing prosecution of these illegal schemes helps protect the average consumer from being forced to pay more than they should for everyday goods.
Gustafson Gluek PLLC has litigated on behalf of plaintiffs in the following cases:
- In re Boiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Ill.) Co-Lead counsel team for class of commercial indirect purchasers. The case alleges chicken suppliers colluded to artificially restrict the supply and raise the price of chicken in the United States. Gustafson Gluek successfully defeated Defendants’ motion to dismiss. This case is on-going.
- In re Automotive Parts Antitrust Litigation (E.D. Mich.) This antitrust case involves sprawling price fixing conspiracies for a number of automobile components. To date, the court has finally approved settlements with some defendants totaling approximately $224.68 million. In September 2016, the court preliminarily approved several additional settlements totaling approximately $379 million.
- In re Lithium Ion Batteries Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal.) Gustafson Gluek represents the direct purchaser plaintiffs in a multidistrict class action arising from the price-fixing of lithium ion batteries. The case involves allegations of collusive activity by a cartel made up of the world’s largest manufacturers of lithium ion batteries, which are used in everything from cellular phones to cameras, laptops and tablet computers. Gustafson Gluek has a significant discovery role in the prosecution of this antitrust class action against the manufacturers of Lithium Ion batteries.
- In re Capacitors Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal.) Gustafson Gluek serves on the executive committee representing a proposed class of indirect purchaser plaintiffs who purchased electrolytic or film capacitors and paid artificially inflated prices. This is a major international cartel case. Plaintiffs allege that at least fifteen multinational corporations conspired to fix the prices of the electrolytic and film capacitors that they manufactured and sold worldwide and into the United States.
- In re Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal.) Gustafson Gluek represents plaintiffs and the class of direct purchasers alleging that the CRT manufacturers conspired to fix the prices of CRT screens used for computer monitors and televisions. Gustafson Gluek has had a significant discovery role in the prosecution of this antitrust class action.
- In re Disposable Contact Lens Antitrust Litigation (M.D. Fla.) Gustafson Gluek represents plaintiffs and a proposed class of individuals who purchased contact lenses made by Alcon, CooperVision, Bausch + Lomb, and Johnson & Johnson. Plaintiffs allege that these manufacturers unlawfully conspired to impose minimum resale price agreements on retailers, which restricts retailers’ ability to lower prices to consumers.
- In re DRAM Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal. and multiple state court actions) Gustafson Gluek was appointed co-lead counsel for the indirect purchasers in this nationwide class action against both national and international memory-chip manufacturers. This case dealt with the conspiracy surrounding the pricing of the memory chips commonly known as Dynamic Random Access Memory (or DRAM). DRAM is used in thousands of devices on a daily basis, and Gustafson Gluek has been integral in achieving what is to date, one of the largest settlements on behalf of indirect purchasers in history.
- In re Containerboard Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Ill.) Gustafson Gluek is a defendant team leader in an on-going price fixing case against containerboard manufacturers. As team leader, Gustafson Gluek handled all aspects of discovery, including the depositions of several senior executives. The two smallest defendants have settled for over $20 million.
- In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Litigation (E.D.N.Y.) Gustafson Gluek is a member of the executive committee working on this national antitrust class action against numerous financial institutions involved in the determination of the fees required to use credit cards at retail establishments.
- Precision Associates, Inc., et al. v. Panalpina World Transport (Holding) Ltd., et al. (E.D.N.Y.) Gustafson Gluek is one of four interim co-lead counsel representing direct purchasers of U.S. Freight Forwarding Services. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants engaged in an international conspiracy to fix, inflate, and maintain new charges or prices for U.S. Freight Forwarding Services in violation of the antitrust laws. The case in currently pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
- The Shane Group, Inc., et al., v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (E.D. Mich.) Gustafson Gluek was appointed interim co-lead counsel representing plaintiffs bringing claims on behalf of a class of purchasers of hospital healthcare services. Plaintiffs alleged that Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan used its market position to negotiate contracts with hospitals that impeded competition and increased prices for patients.
- In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal.) Gustafson Gluek served an integral role handling complex discovery issues in this antitrust action representing individuals and entities that purchased LCD panels at supracompetitive prices. Gustafson Gluek attorneys worked on a range of nuanced domestic and foreign discovery matters in prosecuting this case. The total settlement amount with all of the defendants was over $1.1 billion.
- In re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation (E.D.N.Y.) Gustafson Gluek, was appointed as one of the Co-Lead Counsel for the indirect purchaser plaintiffs in this MDL. The claims arising in this MDL alleged that Defendants engaged in a continuing agreement, understanding and conspiracy in restraint of trade to artificially raise, fix, maintain and/or stabilize the prices for pharmaceutical Vitamin C.