Ford, Mark A.

Mark A. Ford

Mark Ford is an experienced antitrust litigator who represents clients in state and federal courts and in agency investigations in matters concerning alleged monopolization, price fixing, bid rigging and other forms of collusion. Mr. Ford has extensive experience defending antitrust class actions and litigating cases at the intersection of antitrust and intellectual property law.

For clients in the pharmaceutical industry, Mr. Ford has litigated matters, and regularly counsels clients concerning brand-generic settlements as well as defending allegations of sham litigation, Walker Process fraud, improper “Orange Book” listings and “product hopping.” He regularly advises clients on the antitrust implications of life cycle management strategies. He has represented pharmaceutical companies and their employees in federal court, before the Federal Trade Commission, and in matters brought by the European Commission.

Mr. Ford defends clients in follow-on civil litigation arising from cartel enforcement matters. He has served as lead counsel for companies facing multiple class actions, as well as suits by competitors, in the United States based on findings of cartel activities by foreign enforcers.

Mr. Ford also has extensive experience litigating matters and advising clients on competition issues arising from the assertion of standard-essential patents (SEPs). He has litigated several SEP antitrust claims in federal courts on behalf of clients alleging that SEP holders have violated commitments to license SEPs on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms. Mr. Ford has also appeared before the Department of Justice to address issues of SEP abuse. 

Professional Activities

Mr. Ford serves as chair of the firm's Hiring Committee in Boston. He is a member of the Board of Directors of Greater Boston Legal Services. He is a former co-chair of the Antitrust Committee of the Boston Bar Association and also served as co-chair of an ABA Antitrust Section subcommittee charged with revising the ABA's model jury instructions for issues at the antitrust/intellectual property interface. Mr. Ford is admitted to practice before the First, Second and Third Circuit Courts of Appeals, the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts, and the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.

Experience

    • Successfully moved to dismiss “product hopping” claims brought by state attorneys general against a major pharmaceutical company
    • Defeated bid rigging claims asserted against medical imaging company, resulting in settlement involving no payment to plaintiff
    • Successfully moved to dismiss sham litigation claim brought by putative class of indirect purchasers against Braintree Laboratories, Inc.
    • Served as lead counsel for an international auto parts manufacturer in US civil antitrust litigation following a finding of cartel activity in Europe, securing favorable settlement of all class actions.
    • Served as lead antitrust litigation counsel for a major company in the oil industry accused of monopolization based on allegations of Walker Process fraud, securing favorable settlement of all claims
    • Authored amicus briefs to the Second and Third Circuit Courts of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court on key antitrust issues facing the pharmaceutical industry, including reverse payments and product hopping claims.
    • Secured summary judgment dismissing conspiracy claims brought against multiple pharmaceutical companies arising from Hatch-Waxman settlement agreements.
    • Successfully briefed and argued a motion to exclude damages theories asserted by a generic drug company against innovator client, eliminating nearly $300 million in potential liability. 
    • Represented Braintree Laboratories, Inc. in defense of federal antitrust claims arising from alleged sham litigation, prevailing at trial before the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
    • Represented leading technology companies in antitrust claims and agency investigations arising from allegedly anticompetitive assertions of standards-essential patents. 

Recognition

Insights & News

Credentials