William Lavery



Washington, D.C.

P: +1.202.639.7713
F: +1.202.585.1025
William Lavery

Will Lavery is a Partner in the Antitrust and Competition Practice of Baker Botts' Washington, D.C. office, and is the co-head of Baker Botts’ Life Sciences Antitrust Group. Mr. Lavery focuses his practice on antitrust litigation and government investigations, regularly representing leading companies before the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission and in federal courts. A significant part of his practice focuses on the pharmaceutical and healthcare markets, including issues concerning pharmaceutical patent settlements, and a wide range of anticompetitive conduct.

For nearly 20 years some of the world's largest companies have relied on Mr. Lavery's extensive experience in major "bet the company" private and government antitrust litigations, criminal and civil antitrust investigations, and mergers. He has tried a number of cases to verdict, including both bench and jury trials, in federal courts throughout the country, and has served as lead counsel for clients in industries including pharmaceutical, healthcare, technology, chemical, energy, and transportation in cases alleging a broad range of antitrust violations. Many of these litigations have involved nationwide class action claims for both direct and indirect purchaser plaintiffs---seeking billions of dollars in damages---as well as suits brought by federal and state governments. His clients over the years have included Merck & Co, Inc., Novartis AG, Sandoz Inc., Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc., Koninklijke Philips N.V., Lite-On, Toyota Motor North America, Eaton Corp., ExxonMobil, Century Aluminum Company, McWane, Inc., Olin Corp., Patterson Companies, Arch Resources, and Halliburton.

Mr. Lavery has been involved in some of the most high-profile antitrust matters in recent history, including obtaining a dismissal in a case involving Humira, the world's best-selling drug, where class plaintiffs asserted claims involving alleged reverse-payment settlement agreements and a novel "patent thicket" theory (In re Humira (Adalimumab) Antitrust Litig., 465 F. Supp. 3d 811 (N.D. Ill. 2020)). Mr. Lavery was also a member of the trial team that resulted in dismissals of six of the seven price-fixing and monopolization charges for McWane, Inc. in an eight-week bench trial against the FTC. The dismissals marked the first time in almost 20 years that the Commission ruled against itself following an in-house trial in front of the ALJ. The case earned the trial team the award for "Behavioral Matter of the Year - Americas" by Global Competition Review in 2015 (In the Matter of Mcwane, Inc. & Star Pipe Prod., Ltd., 155 F.T.C. 903 (2013)).

Mr. Lavery has been recognized as a leading antitrust practitioner by The Legal 500 (2017-2021) and Super Lawyers (2014-2021), as well as being named a "Rising Star" by Law360 (2016) as one of the top competition lawyers under 40 in the country and a "Next Generation" partner by The Legal 500. He is also the Hiring Partner for Baker Botts' Washington, D.C. office, and is committed to the mentoring and development of junior lawyers.

Related Experience

  • In re Humira Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Ill.). Counsel for Novartis’ Sandoz division in antitrust case involving Humira, the world’s best-selling drug, where class plaintiffs asserted claims involving an alleged reverse-payment settlement agreement between AbbVie and biosimilar manufacturers, and that AbbVie amassed a “patent thicket” of over 100 patents. The district court dismissed the complaint with prejudice.
  • In re Caustic Soda Antitrust Litigation (W.D.N.Y.). Counsel for Olin Corporation in several antitrust class action lawsuits filed in 2015 on behalf of purported direct and indirect purchasers of caustic soda, alleging that defendants (which include nearly all producers of caustic soda in the U.S.) conspired to restrict domestic supply and "fix, raise, maintain and stabilize" caustic soda prices.
  • Takeda Pharma USA, Inc. v. Zydus, Pharmaceuticals (USA), Inc.(D.N.J.). Lead counsel for generic manufacturer Zydus in antitrust case brought in 2018 involving alleged sham litigation and misuse of Hatch-Waxman regulatory scheme.
  • In re Merck Mumps Vaccine Antitrust Litig. (E.D. Pa.). Advised Merck & Co. in case involving alleged monopolization of the purported mumps vaccine market.
  • In re Pork Antitrust Litigation (D. Minn.). Lead counsel for Aldi, Inc. in nationwide class action alleging price-fixing in the pork industry.
  • Top Health System. Represent large health system in its acquisition of an independent acute care hospital, currently under FTC review.
  • High-Tech Manufacturer. Conducted internal investigation of high-tech company, leading to leniency applications to the DOJ and several foreign antitrust authorities.
  • Medical Device Company. Represent medical device company in DOJ investigation regarding various distribution and marketing practices.
  • FTC v. Peabody Energy Corp. and Arch Coal, Inc. (E.D. Mo.). Trial counsel representing Arch Coal in federal court in St. Louis against the FTC’s attempt to block Arch’s joint venture with Peabody Energy.
  • Hatchett v. Henry Schein, Inc. et al. (S.D. Ill.). Counsel for Patterson in a proposed class action alleging a price-fixing scheme in violation of the Illinois Antitrust Act; motion to dismiss granted in February 2020.
  • SourceOne Dental, Inc. v. Patterson Companies, Inc. et al (E.D.N.Y.). Counsel for Patterson Companies, Inc. in a group boycott conspiracy case; following mediation and aggressive pre-trial preparations, in 2018 SourceOne settled its claims on the eve of trial for a fraction of claimed damages and attorneys’ fees (confidential amount).
  • IQ Dental Supply, Inc. v. Henry Schein, Inc. et al. (E.D.N.Y.). Defended Patterson in litigation brought by a rival distributor alleging the same conspiracy as SourceOne Dental; again, in 2019, an aggressive defense resulted in parties settling for a de minimis amount. (IQ Dental Supply, Inc. v. Henry Schein, Inc., 924 F.3d 57 (2d Cir. 2019)).
  • FTC v. McWane, Inc. (F.T.C.). Counsel for McWane, Inc. in a two-month trial against the FTC alleging price fixing and monopolization in the purported market for ductile iron pipe fittings, granted dismissal of six of seven counts.
  • In the Matter of Benco Dental Supply Co., et al. (F.T.C.). Counsel for Patterson in a 2018 three-month bench trial against the FTC in a case alleging price-fixing and a group boycott, which included cross-examination of roughly 65 live fact and expert witnesses; ultimately settled with no monetary penalty or independent monitor.
  • U.S. v. Halliburton Co. and Baker Hughes Inc. (D. Del). Represented Halliburton Co. in DOJ’s lawsuit to block proposed acquisition of Baker Hughes, Inc.
  • Wallach v. Eaton, et al and In re Class 8 Truck Transmission Indirect Purchaser Litigation (D. Del.). Represented Eaton in antitrust class actions brought in federal court in Delaware alleging price fixing. Obtained denial of class certification in indirect purchaser class action, affirmed by the Third Circuit. (In re Class 8 Transmission Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litig., 140 F. Supp. 3d 339 (D. Del. 2015), aff'd in part, 679 F. App'x 135 (3d Cir. 2017)). 
  • In re Ductile Iron Pipe Fittings (Direct and Indirect) Antitrust Litigation (D.N.J.). Counsel for McWane, Inc. in one of four follow-on “copycat” private class actions purporting to represent direct and indirect purchasers of ductile iron pipe fittings, alleging price fixing and monopolization; received favorable nuisance value settlement in 2013 after aggressive merits and class defense.
  • In re: Optical Disk Drive (ODD) Products Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal.). Counsel for Lite-On, PLDS and Philips in large multidistrict antitrust class action cases brought by direct and indirect purchasers, AGs and opt-outs alleging that defendants conspired to fix optical disk drive prices. Defeated class certification of both direct and indirect purchasers and then, after the court certified a modified class, led the arguments on summary judgment.
  • Century Aluminum of South Carolina Inc. v. South Carolina Public Service Authority (D.S.C.). Lead counsel for Century Aluminum in action brought in South Carolina federal court alleging Sherman Act Section 1 and 2 violations.
  • Grand Strand Water and Sewer Authority v. Oltrin Solutions LLC (D.S.C.). Obtained dismissal of defendant Olin Corporation from class action alleging violations of Sherman Act Section 1 case.
  • City of Moundridge, KS v. Exxon Mobil Corporation (D.D.C.). As counsel for ExxonMobil, received a favorable summary judgment in a case charging the company and several competitors with conspiring to fix the price of natural gas. The district court found the testimony of plaintiffs' expert to be entitled to “no weight” because it was “wholly unsupported and speculative” and the D.C. Circuit affirmed.
  • ZF Meritor LLC and Meritor Transmission v. Eaton Corporation (D. Del.). Represented Eaton Corporation at trial and received a final judgment of zero-dollar damages and an order excluding the opposing damages expert as “insufficient and unreliable” in a Sherman Act Section 2 case.
  • In re Cast Iron Soil Pipe and Fittings Antitrust Litigation (E.D. Tenn.). Represented McWane, Inc. in direct and indirect purchaser price fixing class actions.
  • Satnam Distributors, Inc. v. Commonwealth-Altadis et al. (E.D. Pa.) . Represented HLA in antitrust action brought by Satnam Distributors. Received dismissal of Sherman Act Section 1 and 2 claims.
  • Waste Control Specialists LLC v. EnergySolutions LLC (W.D. Tex.). Represented Waste Control Specialists in antitrust case brought by a competitor in federal court in Texas alleging violations of Sherman Act Section 2.
  • American Seed Co., et al. v. Monsanto Company (D. Del.). Represented Monsanto and defeated plaintiffs’ motion for class certification in a class action alleging violations of Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Denial of class certification affirmed by Third Circuit.
  • Monsanto Company v. Syngenta (D. Del.). Represented Monsanto against a Sherman Act Section 2 claim brought by competitor alleging monopolization.
  • MeadWestvaco Corporation. Provided counseling to MeadWestvaco regarding clearance for its $16 billion merger with RockTenn Corporation.
  • Inco Limited. Received DOJ approval for acquisition of Falconbridge Ltd. (nickel and cobalt mining and refining).
  • Linde AG. Represented Linde in the divestiture of its industrial gas retailing and distribution business to Airgas, Inc.
  • Industrial Manufacturer. Represented large industrial manufacturer and its employees before the DOJ in global investigation resulting in multiple leniency applications.

Awards & Community

Recognized as a "Next Generation Partner" by The Legal 500 U.S., 2019, 2020, 2021 & 2022

Recommended in The Legal 500 U.S., 2017-2021

Recognized by Law360 as a "Rising Star" for Competition Law, 2016

Recognized as a Washington D.C. Super Lawyer-Rising Star for Antitrust Litigation, 2014-2021


results Page of

Thought Leadership

results Page of



results Page of

GCR Live 7th Annual Antitrust Law Leaders Forum

Global Competition Review will host its international conference titled “GCR Live 7th Annual Antitrust Law Leaders Forum” from Friday, February 2nd to Saturday, February 3rd in Miami, Florida.