Jonathan L. Lewis

Partner

Washington, D.C.
T 202.861.1557  |  F 202.861.1783

Jonathan Lewis is an antitrust lawyer with experience representing clients in antitrust and commercial litigation matters and merger reviews. His antitrust experience also includes counseling clients on distribution and business matters. Practical yet creative, Jonathan approaches situations from a business perspective, developing solutions that will meet and sustain his clients' corporate objectives.

Jonathan has been described by Global Competition Review as an "up and coming antitrust lawyer" and "talented litigator" with "a particularly impressive background, having worked in economic consulting before law school." Jonathan is a member of the 2016 Competition Law360 editorial advisory board; a regular contributor to BakerHostetler's Antitrust Advocate blog, providing informative commentary on the latest antitrust developments; and a frequent commentator in the press on antitrust and competition related matters.

Select Experience

  • Represented one of Canada’s oldest and largest biopharmaceutical companies throughout the merger clearance process in connection with the sale of that company.
  • Represented worldwide software and product lifecycle management solutions leader throughout merger clearance with acquisition of leading provider of manufacturing software solutions.
  • Advised leading manufacturer of mining and other industrial equipment in its $8.6 billion acquisition of manufacturer of equipment used in surface and underground mining during integration of company.
  • Represented leading steel manufacturer in connection with allegations that steel producers entered into multiyear antitrust conspiracy to reduce production of steel products in the United States through coordinated production cuts for the express purpose of raising price of steel products.
More »

Experience

  • Represented one of Canada’s oldest and largest biopharmaceutical companies throughout the merger clearance process in connection with the sale of that company.
  • Represented worldwide software and product lifecycle management solutions leader throughout merger clearance with acquisition of leading provider of manufacturing software solutions.
  • Advised leading manufacturer of mining and other industrial equipment in its $8.6 billion acquisition of manufacturer of equipment used in surface and underground mining during integration of company.
  • Represented leading steel manufacturer in connection with allegations that steel producers entered into multiyear antitrust conspiracy to reduce production of steel products in the United States through coordinated production cuts for the express purpose of raising price of steel products.
  • Represented affiliates of leading wireless carrier in disputes and related transactions. Cases were resolved by wireless carrier acquiring affiliates for approximately $831 million in cash and assumed debt.
    • Represented three affiliates of leading wireless carrier seeking to enjoin $11 billion transaction from closing. Case was resolved after expedited discovery.
    • Member of trial and appellate teams that represented affiliate of leading wireless carrier in dispute regarding breach of management agreement between parties. Lawsuit alleging a merger would result in breach of certain exclusivity rights was filed after wireless carrier announced $35 billion merger with competitor. Injunction was issued requiring wireless carrier to divest itself of the competing network and assets in affiliate’s service area. Decision was affirmed by Illinois Appellate Court and Illinois Supreme Court denied petition for leave to appeal.
    • Member of trial team that represented two affiliates of leading wireless carrier in a dispute regarding a breach of management agreements between the parties. Court ordered wireless carrier to cease using its trademark to promote competing products in affiliates’ exclusive territories.
  • Represented leading healthcare system against antitrust claims of price fixing brought on behalf of purported class of registered nurses employed by defendant hospital systems. District court denied plaintiffs' motion for class certification of approximately 19,000 registered nurses in 52-page opinion. Settled after plaintiffs' motion for class certification was denied.
  • Advised largest single health carrier in the United States with regard to $2.6 billion acquisition.
  • Advised leading home appliance manufacturer with regard to $1.79 billion acquisition and $107 million sale of non-core product line.
  • Represented leading integrated healthcare delivery system in government investigation of a completed provider transaction and its contracting practices involving employed and independent physicians.
  • Member of team that represented nation’s premier marketing services company in case in which competitor claimed that client’s exclusive contracts with retailers and other conduct violated Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, the Illinois Antitrust Act, and various common law duties. Obtained summary judgment in favor of client and court rejected plaintiffs’ definition of relevant product market. Decision was unanimously affirmed by panel of the Seventh Circuit.

Memberships

  • American Bar Association: Antitrust Section
  • Illinois State Bar Association
    • Antitrust & Unfair Competition Law Section Council: Former Chairman

News

Services

Industries

Admissions

  • U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois
  • District of Columbia
  • Illinois

Education

  • J.D., University of Michigan Law School, 1999, cum laude
  • M.P.M., University of Maryland, 1993
  • B.A., University of Maryland, 1992, with honors in Economics

Blog

In The Blogs

Previous Next
Antitrust Advocate
How to Avoid Antitrust Trouble in Wake of North Carolina Dental Ruling on State Action Immunity
July 25, 2016
BakerHostetler Antitrust Litigation Partners Robert Abrams, Gregory Commins, and Danyll Foix authored an article for The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2016, published by Global Competition Review. The article, headlined “United States...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
Caution: Sealed Package – There Is More At Risk Than Unsealing
June 21, 2016
Parties litigating in courts across the country routinely file some documents under seal as a matter of course. Sealing filed documents often is a practical necessity – parties need not disclose certain confidential information in the...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
Antitrust, Appointments and Presidential Front-Runners: Part 1
June 6, 2016
Substantial and substantive issues of national importance are often ­obscured by the usual myopic and frenzied focus on political talking points, sensational sound bites and collateral name-calling. This is perhaps better exemplified in...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
Second Circuit Resurrects LIBOR Antitrust Case Against Bank Defendants, But Reprieve May Be Short-Lived
June 1, 2016
On May 23, 2016, the Second Circuit breathed new life into the class action case against 16 banks belonging to the British Bankers’ Association (the Banks), vacating the Southern District of New York’s dismissal of the case for lack of...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
Is That a Carrot or a Stick in Your Hand? The Third Circuit Examines the Line Between Competition and Coercion in De Facto Exclusive Dealing Agreements
May 18, 2016
We recently wrote about attempts to force exclusivity onto customers. But firms with large or dominant market shares often must walk a fine line between properly offering customers percentage-based discounts and improperly coercing...
Read More ->