Skip to Main Content

Our Cartel and Government Antitrust Investigations task force provides rapid response when government agents arrive unannounced for dawn raids, seeking to search and seize documents, electronic data and other potentially vital corporate information, or attempting to conduct unscheduled interviews at business locations and employees’ homes. Our antitrust attorneys advise on and assist with strategic responses to grand jury subpoenas, civil investigative demands (CIDs) and other government compulsory processes. Our deep experience as former government prosecutors and antitrust litigators allows us to assess antitrust risk in all phases of proceedings and formulate comprehensive, effective and efficient responses in bet-the-company situations on a wide range of issues, including alleged price-fixing, bid-rigging, customer allocation and no-poach/non-solicit agreements within the U.S. and around the world.

To navigate cartel investigations, we apply a practical perspective to understand the issues and continually optimize our approach and mitigate exposure. If cooperation is the best option, we have the experience to successfully guide companies and individuals through the Antitrust Division’s Leniency Program process, to take advantage of opportunities for non-prosecution agreements or to obtain reduced sentences through deferred prosecution or plea agreements. Our antitrust attorneys work with our clients to identify potential risks and recommend risk-reduction measures, as well as develop compliance programs tailored to business needs and training. We are also prepared to aggressively defend our clients’ rights and interests in litigation, including sentencing and appeals.


  • Represented a corporate client in connection with a DOJ alleged price-fixing investigation regarding the use of software pricing tools and alleged information sharing.
  • Represented a corporate client in connection with a DOJ alleged price-fixing investigation regarding the use of analytic software. No charges were brought against the client.
  • Represented a corporate client in connection with a DOJ alleged price-fixing investigation regarding the insurance industry.
  • Represented the largest Roll-On Roll-Off car carrier in the DOJ investigation into Ocean Shipping Services for cars and trucks; obtained the lowest criminal fines and fewest carve-outs among top carriers.
  • Represented a Japanese container shipping company in the containerized ocean shipping “Box Club” investigation. The investigation closed without any charges or fines.
  • Represented a Japanese container shipping company in a subsequent international containerized shipping grand jury investigation. The investigation closed without any charges or fines.
  • Represented a healthcare company in connection with a DOJ investigation involving allegations of a no-hire agreement and persuaded the DOJ to close the investigation.
  • Represented a Fortune 100 international technology and digital communications technology corporation in a DOJ criminal antitrust investigation involving allegations of price fixing between competitors, convincing the DOJ to close the investigation.
  • Represented a corporate defendant in one of the Antitrust Division’s first indicted criminal no-poach and wage-fixing cases.
  • Represented a Japanese company in connection with a DOJ criminal antitrust grand jury investigation related to the automotive industry and successfully persuaded the DOJ not to prosecute the client.
  • Represented a Japanese company in connection with a global antitrust price-fixing investigation (DOJ, JFTC, KFTC and EU). No charges were brought against the client.
  • Represented a Japanese freight forwarding company in a criminal price-fixing case and obtained a reduction in criminal fines and no carve-outs.
  • Represented a corporate client in connection with a DOJ alleged price-fixing investigation in the generic pharmaceutical industry. No charges were brought against the client.
  • Represented a European company in connection with a global antitrust price-fixing investigation related to the air cargo industry.
  • Represented a healthcare company in connection with a labor practices investigation by the FTC and persuaded the FTC to close the investigation.
  • Represented a healthcare company in connection with an internal investigation and review regarding labor practices.
  • Representing a Fortune 500 company through the Antitrust Division Leniency Program marker process in a matter that presented complex legal and factual issues.
  • Represented a former healthcare company CEO in a first-ever criminal “no-poach” market allocation case. Served as trial counsel and, following an eight-day jury trial, the client was acquitted on all counts. US v. DaVita & Thiry, 21-cr-229 (District of Colorado).
  • Represented the president of a consumer products company in connection with a DOJ criminal antitrust grand jury price-fixing investigation in the construction industry.
  • Represented a former company executive in connection with a DOJ criminal antitrust grand jury investigation related to the education industry; successfully persuaded the DOJ not to prosecute the client.
  • Represented a former company executive in connection with a PCSF investigation relating to national security employment.
  • Represented a global internet platform company executive in connection with a DOJ investigation arising out of an alleged no-poach agreement and persuaded the DOJ to close the investigation.
  • Represented a company executive in connection with a DOJ investigation arising out of alleged criminal monopolization.
  • Represented a Japanese executive in connection with a DOJ criminal antitrust grand jury investigation related to the automotive industry. No charges were brought against the client.
  • Represented a Japanese executive in connection with a DOJ criminal antitrust grand jury investigation and successfully persuaded the DOJ not to prosecute the client.
  • Represented the CEO of a consumer products company in connection with a DOJ investigation arising out of an alleged no-poach agreement and persuaded the DOJ to close the investigation.

Featured Insights