Daniel M. Wall

Dan Wall, recognized as one of the leading antitrust lawyers in the United States, represents a broad range of companies in complex antitrust litigation, government conduct investigations, merger reviews, and counseling. Drawing on more than 35 years of experience, Mr. Wall provides clients with sophisticated advice and unparalleled skills as an antitrust advocate.

Mr. Wall has litigated nearly 100 antitrust cases and argued over a dozen antitrust appeals, including in the United States Supreme Court. Known for his exceptional courtroom skills, he has a particular ability to craft easy-to-understand defenses of complex business practices. He brings complementary expertise in the merger review process, having steered more than 50 mergers through Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) reviews. Mr. Wall also litigates complex commercial cases involving contract and other non-antitrust issues.

Mr. Wall has earned the highest recommendations from every significant publication ranking antitrust lawyers. He is the only antitrust lawyer currently designated as a Star Individual by Chambers USA, and the only litigator in Band 1 of the nationwide category for US antitrust lawyers.

Mr. Wall began his career as a trial lawyer in the Antitrust Division of the US DOJ, where he was a member of the trial team in United States v. AT&T. He currently teaches “Antitrust Investigations and Litigation” at Berkeley Law.

Mr. Wall’s extensive experience includes representing:

• Apple Inc.
  • In Pepper v. Apple, a private class action litigation challenging Apple’s distribution model for iOS apps, in which the US Supreme Court recently heard Apple’s appeal on whether the consumer plaintiffs had standing
  • In private class action litigation challenging an exclusive distribution agreement with AT&T Mobility
  • In various government investigations
• American Airlines
  • In the defense of a private antitrust action challenging the merger of US Airways and American Airlines
  • In a class action claiming a conspiracy to fraudulently charge tourism taxes to exempt passengers
  • In a private action alleging an airline conspiracy to eliminate heavily-discounted “combination fares”
• BMW
  • In class action litigation claiming that German automakers conspired to reduce innovation in automotive technologies and features
• Union Pacific Railroad
  • In multi-billion dollar class action litigation claiming that UP and three other railroads conspired to impose fuel surcharges on rail shippers
• Toshiba Corporation
  • In grand jury investigations and civil litigation concerning multiple alleged price fixing conspiracies
  • In a private antitrust action claiming that Toshiba and others created an anticompetitive standard-setting organization
  • In a successful commercial arbitration against Samsung to enforce a contractual covenant not to sue
• Sumitomo Electric
  • As the successful amnesty applicant and in the defense of class actions relating to a conspiracy to fix the prices of automotive wire harnesses
• Live Nation/Ticketmaster
  • In connection with Live Nation’s merger with Ticketmaster
  • In a US$900 million commercial arbitration brought by CTS Eventim, resulting in a finding of no liability
  • In multiple private antitrust suits
• CooperVision
  • In class actions alleging a conspiracy among contact lens manufacturers to impose vertical price restrictions
• Ferrellgas
  • In defense of an FTC action and related private litigation claiming a conspiracy to reduce the amount of propane in reusable propane tanks
• Genentech
  • In litigation challenging a patent settlement agreement as an anticompetitive restraint of trade, and in a related FTC investigation
  • In defense of a private action by a Russian biotech company claiming exclusion from the US markets for three cancer drugs
• Oracle Corporation
  • As lead trial counsel in the successful defense of a suit brought by the US DOJ and 10 state Attorneys General challenging Oracle’s takeover of PeopleSoft, a victory that was named the Top Defense Win by the National Law Journal in 2004
  • In merger reviews related to Oracle’s acquisitions of Sun Microsystems, BEA Systems, Siebel Systems, and others
  • In numerous private antitrust and contract actions
• Electronic Arts
  • In the defense of a monopolization class action challenging exclusive licenses between EA and the National Football League

• What the New Merger Guidelines Mean for Technology Companies -  April 21, 2010
• Rambus Addresses Some Questions, Raises Others -  May 06, 2008
• The D.C. Circuit Overturns the FTC’s Rambus Decision -  April 25, 2008
• New Standard for Evaluating Minimum Resale Price Agreements Under Antitrust Law -  June 29, 2007
• Supreme Court Vacates $79 Million Monopolization Verdict and Clarifies Rule Regarding Predatory Bidding -  February 27, 2007