Philip S. Van Der Weele

Successfully defended manufacturer of specialized office equipment from claim by former reseller of the equipment that manufacturer had fraudulently induced the reseller to enter into a dealer agreement with the manufacturer. Reseller dismissed fraudulent inducement claim with prejudice after manufacturer filed motion for summary judgment against the claim.

Successfully defended monopolization and attempt to monopolize claims brought against manufacturers by a former reseller. Plaintiff/reseller dismissed antitrust claims with prejudice after defendant/client filed motion for summary judgment.

Defended multinational manufacturer of electronic components in treble damages class action (filed 2015).

Represented unnamed consumer whose complaint to the Federal Trade Commission led to a consent decree against state-regulated river pilots. (http://www.ftc.gov/os/1998/12/9410047agr.htm)

Following second request, convinced the US Department of Justice not to challenge a merger between two regional bakeries.

Convinced State Attorney General not to file a complaint against client at the end of an industry-wide, multistate NAAG investigation.

Convinced US Department of Justice not to indict president of a company that had pled guilty to price fixing.

Convinced US Department of Justice not to indict company following years-long price-fixing investigation.

Obtained favorable Business Review Letter from US Department of Justice approving an exclusive dealing and sales agency arrangement between two providers of medical equipment and devices, Olympus America Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc. (http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/busreview/8971.htm)

Presentation to US Department of Justice on behalf of informant/customer that led to dissolution of joint venture between competitors for the licensing of horse racing content.

Helped convince US Department of Justice not to challenge vertical acquisition, notwithstanding complaints by customers of the upstream entity being acquired.

EID Passport, Inc. v. IntellicheckMobilisa, Inc., United States District Court for the District of Oregon (filed 2009)—Defended IntellicheckMobilisa (NYSE Amex: IDN) in monopolization/attempt case arising out of refusal to deal and threatened enforcement of an allegedly invalid patent. The joint press release that accompanied the settlement stated that IntellicheckMobilisa was not paying any money to EID.

Successfully prosecuted Walker Process antitrust counterclaim for auto transport manufacturer in response to patent infringement lawsuit (2017–2018).

Defending client in numerous securities lawsuits, including class action, arising under Oregon securities laws.

Freightliner LLC v. General Motors Corporation, United States District Court for the District of Oregon (filed 2006)—Represented Freightliner in Sherman 2 case arising out of EDGE pricing/incentive program adopted by Allison Transmission Division of General Motors. Case settled after Freightliner survived a motion to dismiss; terms confidential.

Successfully defended Symbol Technologies, Inc. (NYSE: SBL at the time) in several cases in which companies that Symbol was suing for patent infringement asserted antitrust counterclaims involving all types of alleged abuse of patents.

Retail Imaging Management Group LLC v. FUJIFILM North America Corporation, United States District Court for the District of Oregon (filed 2011)—Defended FUJIFILM in Sherman 2 case arising out of exclusive dealing provision and pricing in “bundled” contract. Case settled after FUJIFILM defeated a motion by plaintiff for TRO and two motions by plaintiff for preliminary injunction and while FUJIFILM’S motion to dismiss was pending.

Successfully defended a financial institution in numerous cases, typically arising as counterclaims to foreclosure on mortgages.

Successfully defended acquiring company in securities case brought by disgruntled shareholder claiming acquisition price was too low.