Snow v. Align Technology, Inc., 3:21-cv-03269
Fideres creates value for law firms and their customers through its unique business approach:
Identifying wrongful corporate conduct through private enforcement actions, through our original investigations.
Improving the chances of surviving motion to dismiss and strike-out applications, by generating early-stage economic evidence of the contested harmful conduct and damages quantum, thanks to Fideres’s access to a very broad range of public and proprietary datasets and Fideres’s expertise in analysing economic data across a large number of industry sectors.
Solving complex problems in damages actions: from applying innovative statistics methodologies, to finding ways to present economic evidence in an easy-to-understand manner, to designing plans of allocation that are simple and workable.
We conduct original investigations to identify wrongful conduct across our areas of expertise. Our structured research approach allows us to identify and study new violations through a variety of sources: news, client leads, anonymous tips, industry insiders. We thoroughly investigate and bottom out any promising leads.
We have developed a thorough case screening methodology that runs through proprietary cartel screens and other quantitative and qualitative analyses to determine the strength of the economic evidence in support of a new case.
We develop ‘plus factors’ analysis, articulate a suitable market definition, develop a preliminary counterfactual model and produce an estimate of damages.
By following such a rigorous process, we present our clients a complete assessment of a new matter that can assist them in making a decision on the legal and economic viability of the claim.
We have a deep understanding of the pleading standards across the jurisdictions where we operate. Our track record shows that early stage, quality economic evidence in pleadings improves chances of lead counsel appointment and motion to dismiss survival.
Recent court orders in the US have gradually increased the pleading standards, especially in antitrust matters, to survive motions to dismiss. Today, economic evidence is often necessary to address threshold issues such as parallel conduct, plus factors and market definition in price fixing cases.
Law firms, regulators and litigation funders appreciate Fideres’s direct style of communication: free from jargon and to the point.
During the course of litigation, we deploy statistical analysis, regression techniques, financial models and other appropriate quantitative models to analyse the conduct and quantify potential damages.
Our team of data scientists and experts can apply a variety of techniques to harvest and analyse data. We have been involved in a number of large cartel cases where data acquisition, cleaning, safe storing and processing proved to be a key factor in the success of the case.
Our team of experts, spanning across different academic, cultural and professional backgrounds is the source of our creative and responsive approach to our clients’ diverse needs and solution to the many unexpected challenges that may arise during litigation.
Pharmaceuticals and healthcare markets can seem as intricate and opaque as they are vital to consumers wellbeing, which makes them crucial sectors for antitrust scrutiny. Our analysis of drug pricing data helps to identify the markets in which pharmaceutical manufacturers collude to raise prices, and our expert testimony on the economics of drug industry helps plaintiffs recover damages. In healthcare markets, Fideres has led pioneering work on market definition and overcharge analysis in the increasingly-concentrated and expensive regional hospital markets of the United States. Sample cases include:
Snow v. Align Technology, Inc., 3:21-cv-03269
Abu Dhabi Investment Authority v. Mylan N.V., 1:20-cv-01342
Tulsa Firefighters Health and Welfare Trust v. Allergan PLC, 2:16-cv-01388
EpiPen ERISA Litigation (Klein v. Prime Therapeutics, LLC), 0:17-cv-01884
Hospital Monopolization Antitrust Class Action, 16-CVS-16404
Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 178 Health & Welfare Trust Fund v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., 2:17-cv-01361
Neca-Ibew Wefare Trust Fund v. Actavis Holdco U.S., Inc., 2:17-cv-00629
Teamsters Local Union No. 727 Health & Welfare Fund v. Mylan, Inc., 3:17-cv-01124
Neca-Ibew Welfare Trust Fund v. Teligent, Inc., 1:16-cv-09398
Generic Pharmaceuticals Pricing Antitrust Litigation (Digoxin), 2:16-md-02724
Neca-Ibew Welfare Trust Fund v. Akorn, Inc., 1:16-cv-08109