Antitrust and Trade Regulation Litigation
Defending businesses against accusations of antitrust and trade regulation violations has placed Osborn Maledon at the forefront of Arizona's leading antitrust law firms. Over the last 30 years, our attorneys have been involved in nearly all of the most important, landmark antitrust cases in Arizona.
Acting as Lead Counsel for the defense in the Cement and Concrete Antitrust Litigation, as counsel for a major tobacco company in the Arizona Tobacco cases, as counsel for a leading software company in its Arizona antitrust litigation, and as counsel for an aerospace products manufacturer in several of their antitrust cases, Osborn Maledon attorneys are fully conversant with all aspects of the federal and Arizona antitrust laws. We represent clients in pursuing or defending complex federal or Arizona antitrust litigation and related trade regulation litigation. This includes litigating claims on behalf of plaintiffs and defendants in unfair trade practices cases, Lanham Act cases and trade secret cases.
With a team headed by two former Chairs of the Arizona antitrust section of the State Bar - both listed in the "antitrust" category in "Best Lawyers in America", our attorneys have the broadest experience in class action procedure. From managing complex discovery to preparing witnesses and experts for antitrust litigation in both state and federal cases, Osborn Maledon provides strong, vigorous representation in all antitrust and trade regulation litigation.
With our substantial experience in all aspects of state and federal antitrust and trade regulation law, Osborn Maledon attorneys have the ability to identify and develop the cutting-edge legal strategies necessary to provide our clients with their best way forward with antitrust claims.Associated Attorneys
- Osborn Maledon ranked in "Best Law Firms" 2015 by U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers®
- Osborn Maledon ranked in "Best Law Firms" 2014 by U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers®
- Aerotec Int'l, Inc. v. Honeywell Int'l Inc., 4 F. Supp. 3d 1123 (D. Ariz. 2014), aff’d 836 F.3d 1171 (9th Cir. 2016)
(summary judgment in favor of defendant on all claims, including monopolization, exclusive dealing, tying, and price discrimination)