联盟成员
Members

加盟律所
  

美国梅瑞律师事务所

业务联系人: 侯江笑 丹尼尔· 梅森 克里斯· 米凯莱蒂 傅黔炜
 
梅瑞律师事务所是专门从事诉讼和纠纷解决的全国性律师事务所,在波士顿,达拉斯,明尼亚波利斯,旧金山和首府华盛顿都设有分所。梅瑞律师事务所擅长在全国和全球范围内为客户代理最具挑战性的反垄断/竞争法,保险,以及其他复杂的大型商业诉讼。我们成功处理复杂和高风险法律纠纷的经验和为客户量身打造的高效务实的解决方案为我们代理的中国客户提供了优势。我们被U.S.News-Best Lawyers 评为2015 年美国最佳律师事务所。 
 
业务概况 :
梅瑞律师事务所具有广泛的代理中美客户的诉讼经验,包括反垄断和不正当竞争,国际贸易和监管,保险,知识产权,银行,以及金融债券。值得提及的是,我们的反垄断业务在全美领先,被马丁– 哈贝尔法律目录(Martindale-Hubbell), Legal 500 和U.S. News 连续几年评为美国领先的反垄断律师事务所之一。我们有接近四十年成功代理美国和国外各大公司反垄断和不正当竞争特别是价格限定诉讼案件的经验。我们在液晶平板反垄断诉讼中赢得了数额最大的间接购买者消费者和解金。此外,我们有丰富的国际代理经验,与英国,欧盟,中国和加拿大的律师事务所在反不正当竞争案件上皆有合作关系。我们在欧洲和美国代理了众多世界 500 强企业的反垄断案件,在英国法院提 起了第一宗反垄断诉讼案。我们代理的主要客户中有包括家乐氏公司, 卡特彼勒公司, 莎莉集团, Smithfield Foods, 康菲石油公司, 卡莱集团公司, 德国安联保险集团, 富国银行和 其它众多大型公司。 
 
中国业务:
梅瑞律师事务所帮助客户处理中国相关的业务已经有三十年,始于我们在中国广东省成功代理家乐氏中国子公司的商标权一案。我们常规性的向与中国合作的美国公司以及计划进入美国市场的中国企业提供法律咨询。在美国第一起针对中国公司的反垄断诉讼案中,我们是石家庄制药集团,中国制药集团和维生药业的代理律师。 梅瑞律师事务所还向中国企业提供关于进入美国市场的法律咨询。我们的中国客户包括大型国企,也有中型外向型企业。受中国旧金山领事馆的邀请我们多次为中国商务代表团举办研讨会,讲述中国公司在进入美国市场时可能遇到的一系列法律问题。此外,我们非常荣幸,我们的法律服务得到了中国驻旧金山领事馆向在美国的中国公司的推荐。 
 
作为中国商务部聘请的特别法律顾问,我们向中国商务部在与贸易相关的问题上提供咨询服务。应中国最高法院的邀请,梅瑞律师事务所召开研讨会,就反垄断法及诉讼程序的相关问题与数位中国法院成员(包括最高法院法官)进行探讨。对中国的新反垄断法的运用提供了法律意见。 
 
我们同中国的一些著名律师事务所建立了牢固的合作关系。我们的合伙人应中国法学院和律师协会的邀请定期举办客座讲座。 
 
我们在代理中国客户方面的深厚经验使得我们深知中国公司涉及跨国争议时所面临的特殊的法律、政治及文化方面的挑战。我们的律师具有中、英文双语能力,这不仅为我们的中国客户提供了特别的沟通便利,帮助我们更好的解决问题和照顾客户想法,并且能够让我们及时、有效的在中国开展复杂的调查、证据发现和研究项目等辅助性法律活动。此外,我们在中国北京的合作所,正见永申律师事务所,是中国顶尖的知识产权和国际纠纷事务所。我们的专业经验,社会关系等资源,以及与中国的长期合作经验使得我们能够为客户提供高效、有力的服务。 
 
我们致力于向中国企业提供最好的专业服务以满足它们在美国的法律需求。欢迎您随时任何有关美中贸易事务或诉讼事宜与我们联系。 
 
Firm Overview 
 
Zelle Hofmann attorneys are proud to represent clients in their most challenging insurance-related disputes, antitrust/competition and other complex business litigation in venues across the United States and around the world. Our experience in successfully resolving high-profile, high-exposure cases and our commitment to efficient and responsive service supports everything we do. 
 
Because we represent both defendants and plaintiffs, our attorneys have developed keen insights and experience from practicing on both sides of the aisle. We can better understand and anticipate the objectives and tactics of opposing counsel, giving our clients a number of distinct advantages. Since our contingency practice obligates us to fund many of our clients' cases, we are particularly adept in avoiding unnecessary tasks and expenses while doing everything to achieve the most favorable outcomes. Our clients appreciate this ability to efficiently staff cases while still delivering exceptional service and consistent results. 
 
We believe – and our clients agree – that the way we approach litigation is key to our success in building solid relationships and implementing effective strategies. Our attorneys offer experience and in-depth knowledge across a wide range of industries, and probe to determine our clients’ specific needs and the broader implications of any dispute. Zelle Hofmann attorneys quickly assess the facts, balance the intangibles, and deliver legal counsel that is creative and realistic. 
 
While the scope of our practice is focused, the diverse talents, intellectual knowledge and technological resources we offer are vast. Zelle Hofmann’s collaborative teams of attorneys, multiple offices and international presence assure that we are always prepared to meet your needs, even in the most challenging, sensitive or catastrophic of circumstances. 
 
Boston | Dallas | London | Minneapolis | San Francisco | Washington DC | Beijing* 
* In association with ZY & Partners
 
Antitrust and Unfair 
 
Competition 
 
PRACTICE CONTACTS 
 
Craig C. Corbitt 
 
Richard M. Hagstrom 
 
Jiangxiao Athena Hou 
 
Daniel S. Mason 
 
Christopher T. Micheletti 
 
Francis O. Scarpulla 
 
Judith A. Zahid 
 
Our approach to antitrust matters is decidedly different from other firms because we commonly represent clients – multi-national corporations, small businesses and consumers – on either side of the docket. We are selective in the litigation we pursue and consistently position that litigation for success in the courtroom. We have found this approach yields the best results for our clients, whether at the settlement table or at trial. We carefully consider the objectives and economic realities of each client, looking for the best way to achieve an outcome that meets those needs. 
 
The experience and track record of Zelle Hofmann attorneys in antitrust is recognized in courts across the nation every day. We have recovered billions of dollars for our clients who are plaintiffs, and we have successfully mitigated other clients’ most significant exposures. We have substantial experience not just settling antitrust matters, but trying them. Martindale-Hubbell consistently ranks Zelle Hofmann as one of the most active antitrust firms in the United States. Our lawyers are often named to lead counsel positions in class action and multi-district matters, but we are also highly effective in representing antitrust defendants and opt-out plaintiffs. 
 
Zelle Hofmann recognizes that many antitrust matters are increasingly international in scope. We routinely work with clients and foreign counsel in the United Kingdom, European Union, Canada and China to coordinate and fully protect our clients’ legal and business interests in a global context. Because of the breadth and depth of our litigation experience, clients often call on us in counseling situations – including consultation on antitrust compliance programs, mergers and acquisitions, and the formation of joint ventures. Boston | Dallas | London | Minneapolis | San Francisco | Washington DC | Beijing* * In association with ZY & Partners
 
Antitrust Cases 
 
Examples of Antitrust Cases 
 
In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation (U.S. District Court, N.D. Cal.). Zelle Hofmann was appointed by the multi-district litigation court to serve as co-lead class counsel for end-user consumers and businesses that purchased TVs, computer monitors, and laptop computer containing LCD screens alleged to have been the subject of one of the largest antitrust cartels in history. All-cash settlements totaling nearly $1.1 billion were reached with the defendants just before trial, leading to one of the largest consumer antitrust recoveries ever obtained. 
 
In re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation (U.S. District Court, E.D.N.Y.). Zelle Hofmann represents one of the largest Chinese pharmaceutical groups in connection with federal and state antitrust class actions filed on behalf of direct and indirect purchasers of vitamin C. This complex, multi-district litigation is the first antitrust case brought against China-based companies in a U.S. court. Zelle Hofmann defended its clients against claims that the Chinese vitamin C manufacturers fixed the price of vitamin C exported to the United States in violation of the Sherman Act. The Chinese vitamin C manufacturers raised an affirmative defense of foreign sovereign compulsion, contending that the 
alleged conduct at issue was compelled by the Chinese Government. All cases 
were consolidated in the Eastern District of New York for pretrial purpose and 
the federal direct purchaser case was tried in early 2013. Zelle Hofmann 
successfully secured settlement for its clients with direct and indirect 
purchasers. 
 
In re Cathode Ray Tubes (CRT) Antitrust Litigation (U.S. District Court, N.D. Cal.). Zelle Hofmann is one of the plaintiffs’ counsel in this antitrust class action on behalf of consumers and businesses in 22 states that bought television and computer monitor products containing Cathode Ray Tubes made by electronics manufacturing giants Samsung, LG, Panasonic, Hitachi, Toshiba and others. Zelle Hofmann attorneys took the lead on researching, briefing and arguing plaintiffs’ class certification motion, which was granted and certified 22 statewide damages classes covering an 11 year class period. 
Boston | Dallas | London | Minneapolis | San Francisco | Washington DC | Beijing* 
* In association with ZY & Partners
 
In re Automotive Parts Antitrust Litigation (U.S. District Court, E.D. Mich.). Zelle Hofmann serves on the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for the End-Payor Plaintiffs in this antitrust class action on behalf of consumers and businesses that bought vehicles containing auto parts systems made by defendant auto parts manufacturers. These cases involve alleged price fixing and bid rigging conspiracies pertaining to 28 different part systems and over 30 defendant company groups; it is one of the largest criminal antitrust 
investigations in history of the U.S. Department of Justice. 
 
Air Cargo Antitrust Litigation (High Court of Justice, London). Zelle Hofmann represents a major international engineering and manufacturing company, shipping goods by air freight all over the world, in an antitrust lawsuit filed in the United Kingdom to recover the overcharges paid by the company as a result of a conspiracy by several of the world’s biggest airlines to fix the prices for international air cargo shipping
services. 
 
Diamonds - Sullivan et al. v. DeBeers et al. (U.S. District Court, D.N.J.). Zelle Hofmann represented consumers in a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of purchasers of diamonds and diamond jewelry in the United States, alleging that the De Beers group of companies unlawfully monopolized the gem diamonds market. The court approved a class action settlement on April 14, 2008. The settlement created a $295 million Settlement Fund for resellers and consumers who purchased diamonds from January 1, 1994 through March 31, 2006. In addition, as part of the settlement, De Beers agreed to a stipulated injunction, which provides that De Beers will abide by federal and state antitrust laws, will not engage in certain specific conduct to control prices or restrict supply, and will submit to the Court’s jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcement of the injunction. The settlement was upheld by the Third Circuit’s December 20, 2011 en banc decision. On May 21, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the objectors’ final petition for review. 
 
Microsoft Antitrust Litigation. Zelle Hofmann brought Indirect purchaser antitrust class actions in state courts in California, Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin, alleging that Microsoft has illegally maintained a monopoly in the market for personal computer operating systems word processing and spreadsheet software. Zelle Hofmann was Co-Lead Counsel in the Minnesota and Iowa cases, both of which were settled in the middle of trial. We were Boston | Dallas | London | Minneapolis | San Francisco | Washington DC | Beijing* 
* In association with ZY & Partners
 
Liaison Counsel and Chair of the Executive Committee in the California case, and principal counsel in Wisconsin. These cases collectively settled for nearly $1.7 billion, a substantial portion of which went to provide computers and related products to lower-income school districts, in addition to compensating class members. These were the largest settlements of private state court antitrust cases in history. 
 
Smokeless Tobacco Antitrust Litigation (California Superior Court, San Francisco). Zelle Hofmann was a member of Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee in this action on behalf of a class of California indirect purchasers of moist snuff products. Plaintiffs alleged that U.S. Smokeless Tobacco monopolized the moist snuff market and engaged in restrictive and exclusionary acts in violation of California state antitrust laws. The case settled for $96,000,000. Under the settlement, class member claimants received cash payments of up to $585. This settlement was one of the largest consumer class action settlements in California state court history, and provided a substantially better recovery to class members than court-approved
settlements in related actions against U.S. Smokeless in Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Kansas, and a 13-state consolidated settlement in Tennessee. Those cases all settled for coupons for U.S. Smokeless moist snuff products rather than for cash payments to class members. 
 
In re Lithium Ion Batteries Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal.). Zelle Hofmann serves as court-appointed liaison counsel for a proposed class of direct purchasers of lithium-ion batteries, the dominant form of
rechargeable battery found in a variety of consumer electronics. The defendant manufacturers are alleged to have formed a cartel to fix the prices of certain lithium-ion battery cells, in violation of federal antitrust law. 
 
Vitamins Antitrust Litigation (U.S. District Court, D.D.C.). Zelle Hofmann represented a major international food manufacturer as an opt-out plaintiff in a federal antitrust action against domestic and foreign manufacturers of bulk vitamins, vitamin premixes and other vitamin products used in the manufacture of food products. The complaint alleged that the manufacturers violated U.S. antitrust laws by, among other things, conspiring to fix prices, allocate sales and allocate customers. The matter was settled on a highly favorable basis to our client, for significantly more money than could have been achieved through Boston | Dallas | London | Minneapolis | San Francisco | Washington DC | Beijing* * In association with ZY & Partners
 
the class action. 
 
Cosmetics Antitrust Litigation (U.S. District Court, N.D. Cal.; California Superior Court,
Marin County). A consumer class action on behalf of California purchasers seeking redress for alleged price-fixing by department stores and manufacturers of highendcosmetics and beauty products. The case settled for injunctive relief and consideration valued at $175 million. DRAM Antitrust Litigation (U.S. District Court, N.D. Cal.; California Superior Court, San Francisco). Zelle Hofmann is the Court-appointed  Liaison Counsel and a member of plaintiffs’ Executive Committee, in a nationwide class action brought by indirect purchasers of DRAM. Plaintiffs allege that DRAM manufacturers conspired to fix the prices from April 1, 1999 through December 31, 2002. The class includes purchasers of computers and other products
containing DRAM, and seeks injunctive relief and damages under state and federal laws. The case settled for almost $310 million in cash, plus injunctive relief; the Court granted preliminary approval to the
settlement on January 17, 2014. The hearing on final approval of this settlement is currently scheduled for June 25, 2014. 
 
Intel Corp. Microprocessor Antitrust Litigation (U.S. District Court, D. Del.). Zelle Hofmann was appointed by the multi-district litigation court to serve as interim co-lead class counsel in a nationwide class action against Intel on behalf of consumer and business purchasers of x86 microprocessors used in personal computers and other products. The complaint alleges that Intel abused its dominant position in the x86 microprocessor market by, among other things, engaging in exclusive dealing arrangements with various Original Equipment Manufacturers such as Dell, HP, IBM/Lenovo, and NEC in an effort to lock AMD out of several key market segments. The complaint alleges that as a result of these practices consumers and businesses paid artificially high prices for products containing Intel’s x86 microprocessors. Cast Iron Soil Pipe Antitrust Litigation (U.S. District Court, N.D. Cal.). Zelle Hofmann filed a direct purchaser class action against defendant manufacturers of cast iron soil pipe (“CISP”) for violations of the federal antitrust laws. Plaintiffs allege a conspiracy among the defendants to fix prices for CISP from 2006 to the present, and that one defendant’s acquisition and Boston | Dallas | London | Minneapolis | San Francisco | Washington DC | Beijing* * In association with ZY & Partners
 
liquidation of a competitor’s CISP business unlawfully decreased competition 
in the market for CISP. 
 
Natural Gas Antitrust Cases (U.S. District Court, D. Nev.; California Superior Court, San Diego). Zelle Hofmann was Co-Lead Counsel in the federal class action and a member of the Executive Committee in the state class action against marketers of natural gas in California, alleging violations of the Sherman Act, California Cartwright Act and the Unfair Competition Act. The actions were brought on behalf of direct and indirect persons and entities in California who purchased natural gas between January 1, 2000 and 
December 31, 2001, i.e., during the California Energy Crisis. The actions alleged that, among other things, the defendants and their co-conspirators engaged in a variety anticompetitive practices which raised interstate natural gas transportation prices, the bundled price of natural gas, spot natural gas prices, and natural gas market basis swap derivative settlement amounts in and for California. The federal class action ended with settlements totaling approximately $26 million, while the state class action resulted in settlements totaling almost $165 million. 
 
Credit/Debit Card Tying Cases (California Superior Court, San Francisco). Zelle Hofmann is lead counsel for a class of California consumers of products and services from retail businesses that accepted and/or issued Visa and MasterCard payment cards, alleging that defendants’ violations of the California state antitrust and unfair competition laws resulted in higher prices for consumers. In April 2013, the Superior Court granted final approval to settlements totaling $31 million in cash with defendants. Pet Food Express Ltd. v. Royal Canin USA Inc. (N.D. Cal.). Zelle Hofmann represented Pet Food Express, a regional pet-supply retailer, in a breach of contract dispute with supplier Royal Canin where the supplier asserted counter-claims based on California unfair competition law. Zelle Hofmann successfully obtained the district court’s dismissal of the counter-claims on a motion for summary judgment. 
 
El Sineitti v. ConocoPhillips Company (California Superior Court, San Francisco). Zelle Hofmann represented a major refiner and distributor of petroleum fuel products in defense of price-discrimination claims brought Boston | Dallas | London | Minneapolis | San Francisco | Washington DC | Beijing* * In association with ZY & Partners
 
Boston | Dallas | London | Minneapolis | San Francisco | Washington DC | Beijing* 
* In association with ZY & Partners 
 
under California law by a former branded dealer gas station. Zelle Hofmann successfully obtained summary judgment on behalf of its client, and secured a decision from California C