Eric P.Enson

Partner

Los Angeles + 1.213.243.2304 San Francisco + 1.415.963.6994

Connect:

Share

Eric Enson has successfully served clients in some of the most complex international cartel investigations and antitrust class actions of recent years, including major jury trials.

Eric has extensive experience responding to Department of Justice investigations of alleged collusion and follow-on civil litigation. He has defended companies against claims of price-fixing in the computer components, technology, capacitors, optical disk drive, auto parts, semiconductors, and packaged ice industries, as well as a number of nonpublic criminal proceedings.

Eric has been counsel in precedent-setting civil competition matters, such as Clayworth v. Pfizer and In re Tobacco II Cases. He served as trial counsel for Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in an antitrust lawsuit alleging an unlawful group boycott, on which a jury returned a full defense verdict, and was part of the trial team that obtained a full defense jury verdict on antitrust claims filed against Macy's in In re Tableware. Eric also regularly handles matters involving claims of monopolization and other types of unilateral conduct.

Eric's experience extends to false advertising matters. He has handled the prosecution and defense of false advertising claims between competitors and has defended consumer class actions regarding the marketing of various commercial products.

Eric is consistently recognized and ranked by Chambers, Best Lawyers in America, and The Legal 500 as a leading competition lawyer. He advises the Executive Committee of the Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section of the California Bar and is an active member of the ABA Antitrust Law Section, frequently writing and speaking about novel competition issues.

Experience

  • Tesoro wins summary judgment dismissing two consolidated antitrust class actionsAs lead counsel of Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company, a subsidiary of Marathon Petroleum Corporation, Jones Day won summary judgment in two consolidated antitrust class actions in which gasoline stations and consumers sought a combined $72 billion in treble damages.
  • U.S. Chamber of Commerce achieves victory in antitrust challenge to Seattle for-hire driver collective-bargaining ordinanceJones Day represented the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in a lawsuit challenging a collective-bargaining ordinance enacted by the City of Seattle.
  • Patterson Dental Supply faces contract dispute over its dental practice management softwareJones Day is defending Patterson Dental Supply, Inc. against allegations by Demandforce, Inc. and Sesame Communications, Inc. that Patterson committed tortious interference and trade libel when Patterson informed its customers that it had terminated contracts with Sesame and Demandforce that had allowed those companies to interface with Patterson's dental practice management software.
  • ICANN challenges its award of .WEB top-level domain in Independent Review ProcessJones Day represented ICANN in an Independent Review Process (IRP) under the ICDR Rules and ICANN’s Supplementary Rules and Bylaws, relating to its conduct of an ICANN-administered auction and subsequent award of the .WEB top-level domain to New Dotco LLC (NDC) for $135 million.
  • Confidential client defends worldwide investigations of alleged cartel activity in electrolytic capacitors sectorJones Day is defending a confidential client in worldwide investigations of alleged cartel activity in the electrolytic capacitors sector.
  • Manufacturer obtains dismissal of qui tam actionsJones Day defended a manufacturer against a False Claims Act action brought over allegations that our client had overcharged the government due to alleged antitrust violations.
  • Goodyear prevails in long-running dealer termination disputeJones Day obtained the dismissal of a long-running lawsuit filed by a California distributor challenging The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company's termination of its dealer contracts as breaches of contracts, tortious interference, and violations of California unfair competition and federal antitrust law.
  • ICANN prevails in Ninth Circuit appeal of landmark ruling dismissing TLD monopolization claimOn July 31, 2015, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the landmark decision by a federal district court in the Central District of California to dismiss with prejudice name.space's monopolization claim against Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ("ICANN"), a long-time Jones Day client.
  • Manufacturer resolves investigation into alleged cartel activitiesJones Day represented a manufacturer facing investigations by multiple competition authorities regarding alleged cartel activity in the autoparts industry.
  • Los Angeles associates negotiate return of client's vehicle wrongfully withheld by "loan shark"Jones Day Los Angeles and Public Counsel, the nation's largest public interest law firm, successfully negotiated a settlement on behalf of pro bono client Ramon Gonzalez.
  • Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital jury verdict in antitrust case affirmed on appealIn April 2012, after nearly seven weeks of testimony and just over a day of deliberations, a jury in Santa Barbara, California, returned a complete defense verdict in favor of Jones Day client Cottage Health System, Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital, and four local neurosurgeons.
  • Boehringer Ingelheim successfully defends appeal of summary judgment in California antitrust actionJones Day represented pharmaceutical manufacturer Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in an antitrust action brought by California pharmacies claiming that Boehringer Ingelheim and other drug companies conspired to inflate drug prices in the United States and keep lower-priced Canadian drugs off the market.
  • Arctic Glacier resolves federal antitrust class action litigation involving packaged ice industryJones Day defended Arctic Glacier, Inc. against federal antitrust class actions by direct purchasers against several U.S. packaged ice companies, alleging conspiracy to fix prices for packaged ice.
  • Albertson's successfully defends California AG antitrust litigation related to labor union negotiationsJones Day defended supermarket chain Albertson's, Inc. against antitrust claims asserted by the California Attorney General in connection with a "mutual strike assistance agreement" that Albertson's entered into with Vons and Ralphs, two other grocery store companies.
  • City of Hope forms City of Hope Medical FoundationJones Day advised the City of Hope in connection with the development and formation of City of Hope Medical Foundation (COHMF) and the purchase by COHMF of California Cancer Specialists Medical Group (CCSMG) and Oncology Specialists of COH (OSCOH).
  • ABM acquires Five Star Parking, Network Parking, and System Parking from L&R Group of CompaniesJones Day advised ABM Industries in the acquisition of Five Star Parking, Network Parking Company and System Parking from L&R Group of Companies.
  • Arctic Glacier defeats class certification in Wisconsin state court antitrust case involving packaged ice industryOn behalf of Arctic Glacier Inc., Jones Day obtained denial of plaintiff's motion for class certification for an antitrust claim filed in Wisconsin state court arising out of an investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice into allegations of price fixing and market allocation in the packaged ice industry.
  • Arctic Glacier obtains dismissal of Kansas state court antitrust price fixing litigationRepresenting Arctic Glacier Inc., Jones Day obtained dismissal of antitrust and tort litigation filed in Kansas state court arising out of an investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice into allegations of price fixing and market allocation in the packaged ice industry.
  • Chevron and Unocal successfully resolve antitrust class actions regarding reformulated gasolineJones Day defended Union Oil Company of California, together with parent corporations Unocal Corporation and Chevron Corporation, in 14 federal (MDL) and state court class actions, all of which were patterned after a March 2003 FTC administrative complaint (i.e., FTC Docket No. 9305).
  • Experian wins appeal of California antitrust action filed by consumer credit report resellersJones Day led the defense of Experian Information Solutions, Inc. against antitrust cases filed in March 2004 in federal court and state court in California by resellers of consumer credit reports on behalf of a class of resellers (the federal case) and by a trade association of resellers (the state case).
    • View All

    November 2022 Alert

    DOJ Brings First Criminal Monopolization Case in 50 Years

    April 2022 Commentary

    DOJ Makes Giving Up Harder: Stricter Requirements for Seeking Leniency

    January 2020 Alert

    Antitrust Alert: Executive Extradited While Visiting Italy Ten Years After Cartel Charges

    July 2019 Jones Day Publications

    Antitrust Alert: New DOJ Criminal Enforcement Policy Boosts Value of Antitrust Compliance Programs

    June 2018 Commentary

    The Cost of Doing Business: Supreme Court Vacates Chinese Defendants' Antitrust Win

    May 2018 Alert

    Antitrust Alert: CEO Indicted for Seafood Price-Fixing

    August 2017 Commentary

    DOJ Obtains Price-Fixing Guilty Plea from E-Commerce Company and Top Executive

    August 2017 Commentary

    DOJ Antitrust Corporate Dispositions May Protect Some Culpable Employees

    May 2017 Commentary

    DOJ-Antitrust Revises Guidance on Coverage of "Current" Employees in Company Leniency Agreements

    November 2016 External Publications

    Surviving an Unannounced Search - Employees Must Balance Compliance and Rights When Facing an Antitrust Dawn Raid, Metropolitan Corporate Counsel
    View All

    Additional Publications

    • December 2015
      Litigating Civil Antitrust Matters in the United States, Matthew Bender
    • September 2015
      Litigating Civil Antitrust Matters in the United States, LexisNexis
    • Fall 2012
      Be Quick, But Don't Hurry - An Initial Checklist For Responding To A Grand Jury Subpoena Served By The Antitrust Division, Cartel & Criminal Practice Committee Newsletter, ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Cartel & Criminal Practice Committee
    • Summer 2012
      The California Court Of Appeal's Flagship Opinion - A Lifeline For Antitrust Plaintiffs Or A Sinking Vessel, Competition, The Journal of the Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section of the State Bar of California
    • 2012
      California Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section of the State Bar of California, contributing editor
    • Spring 2012
      Antitrust Law Developments (Seventh), contributing editor, ABA Section of Antitrust Law
    • Spring 2011
      The California Supreme Court's Kwikset Opinion - A Glass Half-Empty And Half-Full, The Journal of the Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section of the State Bar of California
    • July 21, 2010
      Competitor Standing Under California's Unfair Competition Law, Los Angeles Daily Journal
    • 2010
      Antitrust Law Developments (Seventh), contributing editor, ABA Section of Antitrust Law
    • Spring 2010
      The Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement And Reform Act: Its Past, Present And Future, The Antitrust Trial Practice Committee Newsletter, ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Trial Practice Committee
    • Spring 2010
      Hemi Group v. City of New York - The Monet of RICO Causation Standards, Business Torts and RICO News, Vol. 6, Issue 2, ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Business Torts & Civil RICO Committee
    • 2010
      Contributing Editor, California Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law (Third), Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section of the State Bar of California
    • March 31, 2010
      Davis v. Ford Motor Credit Company: More Confusion Regarding the Definition of "Unfair" or an Indication of Growing Consensus?, The Journal of the Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section of the State Bar of California
    • February 16, 2010
      Antitrust Enforcers Get Aggressive, Los Angeles Daily Journal
    • 2002
      Contributor, Antitrust Evidence Handbook, Second Edition, American Bar Association
    • 1999
      A Roadblock on the Detour Around the First Amendment: Is the Enforcement of English Libel Judgments in the United States Unconstitutional?, 21 Loy. L.A. Int'l & Comp. L.J. 159

    Speaking Engagements

    • June 3, 2022
      USC Global Competition Law Thought Leadership Conference
    • March 30, 2017
      65th Antitrust Law Spring Meeting, Joint Defense Group Ethics
    • September 13, 2014
      Antitrust & Unfair Competition Law From A to Z, 87th Annual Meeting of the State Bar of California
    • April 30, 2014
      Restrictive Practices in Retailing and Distribution, Los Angeles County Bar Association
    • February 19, 2014
      The E-Books Case: Getting Everyone on the Same Page, ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Joint Conduct and Media & Technology Committees
    • March 6, 2013
      Competitor Collaborations and Competitive Restraints, Strafford Seminar
    • February 21-22, 2013
      Critical Issues & Timely Resolutions, CLE International Antitrust Law
    • January 9, 2012
      Consumer Protection Law Update, ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Consumer Protection Committee
    • October 12, 2011
      Recent Government Challenges to Most Favored Nation Provisions, ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Unilateral Conduct Committee
    • March 2, 2011
      Creating an Effective Compliance Program for the Detection and Prevention of Cartel Conduct, ABA Section of Antitrust Law, moderator, Cartel & Criminal Practice and Compliance & Ethics Committees
    • October 21, 2010
      Representing Third Party Clients Subject to an Antitrust Agency's Formal Information Request, ABA Section of Antitrust Law
    • June 7, 2010
      Consumer Protection Law Update, ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Consumer Protection Committee
    • March 25, 2010
      CLE International Antitrust 2010 Conference

    Before sending, please note:

    Information on www.jonesday.com is for general use and is not legal advice. The mailing of this email is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Anything that you send to anyone at our Firm will not be confidential or privileged unless we have agreed to represent you. If you send this email, you confirm that you have read and understand this notice.