Eastern Pennsylvania District Court Judge Gene Pratter recently denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment in a case alleging that the nation’s major egg producers conspired to artificially increase the price of shell eggs.
Our experts and staff often publish in scholarly journals and provide continuing education to attorneys on economic and financial issues arising in litigation. Review our News entries for awards, events and commentary as well as information about recent verdicts and rulings.
Last week, OnPoint expert Dr. Gordon Rausser testified at a Class Certification hearing in a multibillion-dollar class action lawsuit against some of country’s largest railroad companies (In re: Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation).
OnPoint is pleased to introduce the latest addition to our staff: Leonore Ralston. Her extensive experience performing evaluations of financial evidence includes breach of contract claims, alleged wage-and-hour violations, lost profits and lost earnings claims, fraud investigation and prevention, and securities litigation.
Christine Davis, CPA, CFF, CVA, CGMA, has joined OnPoint Analytics to head up its growing accounting-based litigation practice. As a seasoned expert witness, we spoke to Chris about her view of the profession and her plans at OnPoint.
Last week, OnPoint expert Dr. Stephen Hamilton presented the results of his recent research and answered stakeholder questions as part of a public workshop hosted by the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”) at their headquarters in downtown Sacramento. The workshop marked the initial public release of three studies funded by CARB to investigate potential improvements to the current metrics used for determining the risk of emissions leakage in various industrial sectors.
In an Amended Final Judgment issued on April 25, 2016, Judge William H. Orrick upheld the jury’s award of $10,240,000 to the plaintiff in Fujifilm Corp. v. Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc. et al, a patent infringement suit. The jury’s verdict on damages aligned with the estimates provided by OnPoint expert Dr. Gareth Macartney—who testified on behalf of Fujifilm during last year’s trial—rather than those provided by Motorola’s damages expert. The Court also awarded Fujifilm pre-judgment interest at the prime rate, compounded quarterly, as calculated by Dr. Macartney.
OnPoint experts Gordon Rausser and Gareth Macartney co-authored an article featured in the Spring 2016 issue of Antitrust Magazine—an issue entirely devoted to class actions on the 50th anniversary of the 1966 amendments to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which governs class action cases in federal courts. The article explores how certification standards have become increasingly rigorous in class action litigation, particularly with recent landmark rulings in In re Hydrogen Peroxide Antitrust Litigation (2008), Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes (2011), and Comcast Corp. v. Behrend (2013).
The District Court of Eastern Pennsylvania recently certified the shell egg sub-class in a case brought on behalf of direct purchasers who alleged that the nation’s major egg producers conspired to artificially increase the price of shell eggs in the United States. Judge Pratter’s class certification decision relied extensively on the testimony and analyses of OnPoint expert Dr. Gordon Rausser, who examined the economics of U.S. egg production and pricing and testified on behalf of the Direct Purchaser Class.
OnPoint Analytics has been recognized as one of the best firms for “Intellectual Property Litigation Consulting Services” in The Recorder’s recent “Best of 2015” issue. The Recorder’s annual list ranks the top legal services providers according to a reader survey of nearly 3,000 legal professionals working throughout California.
OnPoint Expert Dr. Gareth Macartney testified as Fujifilm’s damages expert at a jury trial held last month in the U.S. District Court for Northern California. The case involved allegations that Motorola incorporated technologies patented by Fujifilm into its mobile phones and tablets. Following a two-week trial, the seven-person jury awarded Fujifilm $10.2 million in damages after determining that Motorola infringed upon U.S. Patent 6,144,763.