Adam L. Hudes focuses his practice on representing litigants in antitrust and complex commercial disputes. Adam places a particular emphasis on pricing and distribution practices, single-firm conduct, and the application of the antitrust laws to high technology industries. He is a group leader of Mayer Brown’s Antitrust & Competition practice and is recognized as a Rising Star for Antitrust Litigation by Super Lawyers.
Adam’s representations have included some of the largest antitrust and unfair competition cases filed in recent years by private plaintiffs and the class action bar. These cases have addressed a variety of legal theories including price-fixing, monopolization, Robinson-Patman Act violations, exclusive dealing, sham litigation, false advertising, patent misuse, and other business torts.
Adam represented Nestlé USA in In re Chocolate Confectionery Antitrust Litigation, one of the largest multi-district antitrust litigation matters to date involving allegations of a conspiracy to fix the price of chocolate candy products.
The defense of Nestlé USA was nominated by Global Competition Review for 2015 “Litigation of the Year – Cartel Defense.” Adam has also represented companies in investigations and merger reviews conducted by the Federal Trade Commission, US Department of Justice, and state authorities.
In addition, Adam regularly counsels clients on marketing, distribution, resale pricing, brand protection, and other trade practice matters. He often speaks at client retreats on antitrust compliance and advises on the design and implementation of antitrust compliance programs. Adam has authored numerous articles and analysis regarding antitrust law developments, distribution matters, and litigation practice.
- Cornell Law School, JD
- Duke University, BA
- District of Columbia
- New York
- I and U, Inc., et al. v. Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc., (C.D. Cal.). Representing Wolters Kluwer in an antitrust action alleging monopolization of the market for health science periodicals through exclusive sales agreements and false statements to customers.
- Ethical Coffee Company SA v. Nespresso USA, Inc. Representing Nespresso USA against claims that it has monopolized the alleged espresso market by redesigning its Original Line machines to exclude competing espresso capsules. Secured dismissal of the foreign parent company for lack of personal jurisdiction and defeated Lanham Act claim at the pleading stage.
- Masimo Corporation v. Philips Electronics North America Corporation(D. Del.). Represented Philips Electronics North America Corporation in connection with its claims against Masimo for monopolization, attempted monopolization, tying, and patent misuse related to pulse oximetry products.
- In re Gerber Probiotic Sales Practices Litigation. Represented Gerber in twelve-case consolidated nationwide consumer class action alleging false advertising under consumer protection laws of multiple states with respect to the advertised health benefits of baby formula and cereal products. Case substantially narrowed through multiple successful motions to dismiss.
- Syngenta Seeds, Inc. v. Monsanto Company. Represented Monsanto against a Sherman Act Section 2 claim brought by competitor alleging that Monsanto had either monopolized or attempted to monopolize the alleged market for transgenic corn seed.
- In re Cathrode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation. Represented Philips Electronics in defense of direct and indirect purchasers class actions alleging price fixing conspiracies in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and State Antitrust Laws.
- Lee v. State of Maryland. Represented criminal defendant in appellate proceedings before Maryland Court of Special Appeals.
- In re Kavuo Matabishi. Successfully represented citizen of the Democratic Republic of the Congo in efforts to obtain asylum in the United States. Awarded asylum following merits hearing in immigration court.
Rate : $$$