Gregory J. Commins Jr.

Partner

Washington, D.C.
T +1.202.861.1536
F +1.202.861.1783

Overview

Greg Commins is an established trial lawyer who focuses his practice on matters involving antitrust class action litigation, intellectual property disputes and complex commercial litigation. He has experience representing both plaintiffs and defendants in multiweek trials and on appeal throughout the country, as well as providing counsel on a variety of complicated commercial issues.

Greg is a contributor to BakerHostetler's Antitrust Advocate blog, providing informative commentary on the latest developments in the antitrust litigation sector. He is also an Accredited Mediator through the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution.

Select Experience

  • Representing a class of dairy farmers in the northeastern United States against defendants in an action alleging violations of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act by unlawfully conspiring to eliminate competition for the marketing, sale and purchase of raw milk in the Northeast.
  • Represented a certified class of dairy farmers located in 14 southeastern states against Dairy Farmers of America, Dean Foods and a number of other defendants in an action alleging violations of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act by unlawfully conspiring to eliminate competition for the marketing, sale and purchase of raw milk in the Southeast. The litigation was settled for more than 70 percent of the alleged damages.
  • Represented a manufacturing client in two five-week jury trials regarding the prosecution of breach of contract and trade secret misappropriation claims involving the proper ownership and inventorship of fuel injector patents in which the plaintiff's verdicts were rendered. Moved for summary judgment against the defendants' counterclaims for breach of contract, trade secret misappropriation and fraud, which was granted.
More »

Experience

  • Representing a class of dairy farmers in the northeastern United States against defendants in an action alleging violations of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act by unlawfully conspiring to eliminate competition for the marketing, sale and purchase of raw milk in the Northeast.
  • Represented a certified class of dairy farmers located in 14 southeastern states against Dairy Farmers of America, Dean Foods and a number of other defendants in an action alleging violations of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act by unlawfully conspiring to eliminate competition for the marketing, sale and purchase of raw milk in the Southeast. The litigation was settled for more than 70 percent of the alleged damages.
  • Represented a manufacturing client in two five-week jury trials regarding the prosecution of breach of contract and trade secret misappropriation claims involving the proper ownership and inventorship of fuel injector patents in which the plaintiff's verdicts were rendered. Moved for summary judgment against the defendants' counterclaims for breach of contract, trade secret misappropriation and fraud, which was granted.
  • Represented a manufacturing client in a private antitrust case challenging parts acquisition and distribution practices. The client prevailed on directed verdict motion on the antitrust claims and obtained a jury verdict on the state law claims after presentation of the case to a jury in a five-week trial. 
  • Represented a manufacturing client in nine lawsuits over seven years involving claims of breach of contract, breach of license agreements, tortious interference, trade secret misappropriation and fraud in which settlements were obtained. Handled similar matters for the client against the same parties in multiple federal districts (patent infringement cases), Illinois state court (breach of contract claims) and before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (separate interference and reexamination proceedings).
  • Represents a manufacturing client in a patent infringement action with a supplier alleging the client's infringement on five patents related to tool production. Countered with a claim that the supplier had infringed on two of the client's patents. The ongoing matter is challenging the business relationship between the client and supplier, adding challenges to the business operations feeding into competing lawsuits.
  • Served as counsel on behalf of steel company plaintiffs alleging unlawful conspiracy to monopolize against various railroads. The matter resulted in a plaintiff's verdict, which was upheld on appeal.
  • Represented a client in a patent infringement lawsuit involving WCDMA and GSM technology in which the stipulation of noninfringement of one patent was reached following the court's Markman ruling; on the second patent, an order was entered precluding the plaintiff's damages expert under Daubert and summary judgment of no-pursuit damages based on the plaintiff's failure to mark under 35 U.S.C. 287(a) was obtained.
  • Representing a manufacturing client in a patent infringement lawsuit involving vehicle tracking technology.
  • Representing a manufacturing client in a patent infringement suit related to vehicle management systems.
  • Representing a manufacturing client in a patent infringement suit related to an internet organizer for accessing geographically and topically based information.
  • Served as counsel in a four-week jury trial involving claims of copyright infringement and breach of contract involving software. Following the trial, the parties settled the case.
  • Acted as counsel in a bench trial. Sought a preliminary injunction against trade secret misappropriation in a case involving the provision of technical support services to the Royal Saudi Air Force.
  • Serving as counsel in a six-week jury trial, defended a client against antitrust, fraud and misrepresentation claims based on a manufacturer's export restrictions that were promulgated in order to support overseas distributors and customers. Obtained judgment as a matter of law on the antitrust claims at the close of all the evidence. The jury returned verdicts in favor of the client on all remaining claims. The judgment was affirmed on appeal.

Recognitions and Memberships

Recognitions

  • The Legal 500 United States (2014 to 2019)
    • Recommended in Antitrust - Civil Litigation/Class Actions: Defense
  • Washington, D.C. "Super Lawyer" (2012 to 2019)
  • CEDR Accredited Mediator

Memberships

  • Pauline Newman American's Inn of Court
  • American Bar Association

Pro Bono

  • Worked with the Archdiocesan Legal Network.

Prior Positions

  • Howrey LLP, Commercial Litigation Group: Co-Chair

Admissions

  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
  • U.S. District Court, District of Colorado
  • U.S. District Court, District of Columbia
  • U.S. District Court, Central District of Illinois
  • District of Columbia
  • New York

Education

  • J.D., Georgetown University Law Center, 1990, magna cum laude; Order of the Coif; Executive Editor, Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics (1989 to 1990)
  • B.A., Cornell University, 1987

Blog

In The Blogs

Previous Next
Antitrust Advocate
Executive Order Addresses DOJ's Fight Against Hoarding Activity
By Rachel Palmer Hooper
March 25, 2020
On the afternoon of March 23, 2020, United States Attorney General William Barr participated in the Coronavirus Task Force press briefing. Attorney General Barr revealed that, on March 23, President Trump issued an executive order allowing...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
Protection of Consumers and the Public in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic
By Rachel Palmer Hooper
March 23, 2020
Federal and state authorities are working to protect consumers and the public during the current COVID-19 pandemic. The Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a cautionary press release announcing its “intention to hold accountable anyone who...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
The Need for Special Masters in Complex Antitrust Cases
March 5, 2020
The ABA resolution advises the bench and bar that utilization of special masters has evolved over the last 50 years from the rare exception to a commonplace tool to manage complex litigation, including antitrust cases. In 2019, the...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
Should Antitrust Laws Tackle Privacy Issues? DOJ and State AGs Continue Google Investigations in Response to Privacy Concerns
By Darley Maw
February 28, 2020
Months have passed since it was first revealed in July 2019 that the Department of Justice (DOJ), in response to various stakeholders’ concerns, was conducting a review into certain “market-leading online platforms” and whether they...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
Can ‘Hijacking' a Single Cryptocurrency Network Violate Antitrust Laws?
By Ivory L. Bishop Jr.
February 19, 2020
On Jan. 28, a federal judge in Florida dismissed without prejudice the nation’s first antitrust suit involving cryptocurrency. The plaintiff, United American Corporation Inc., (UAC), alleged that five entities and six individuals conspired...
Read More ->