Hosted by the Antitrust Law Committee of the Business Law Section
Ten years after Twombly, is the pleading standard for a Sherman Act Section 1 cartel case any clearer? Often motions to dismiss in these cases come down to alleged circumstantial evidence, such as market conditions that seem inconsistent with price increases, antitrust violations in foreign jurisdictions, trade association activities, otherwise innocuous public statements and the defendants' ambiguous business documents regarding buy/sell relationships with competitors, competitive intelligence and other ordinary course conduct.
This CLE program will tackle the approaches courts have taken in assessing such evidence at the motion to dismiss stage to determine a conspiracy's "plausibility," as well as how practitioners can use guidance from the courts in counseling clients and formulating litigation strategies. The speakers will examine the Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act (ACPERA) and how it has impacted the early stages of cartel litigation.
Specific issues covered will include:
- What types of circumstantial evidence have courts found most compelling at the motion to dismiss stage?
- What practical advice can accordingly be given to clients to avoid the risk of cartel litigation?
- How have pre-Complaint factual investigations shifted for plaintiffs' counsel in light of courts' evolving analysis under Twombly?
- What is ACPERA and how should it inform both plaintiffs' and defendants' litigation strategies in cartel cases going forward?
Join the Antitrust Law Committee to hear best practices regarding how to navigate through antitrust cartel litigation.