Robert Milne's principal areas of practice are complex litigation and counseling in the areas of antitrust (civil and criminal) and trade regulation. He has represented clients in a variety of industries, including pharmaceutical, agricultural, petrochemical, financial services, chemical, electric generating, cable, telecommunications, and leisure. Mr. Milne has litigated jury and non-jury cases before federal and state courts throughout the United States, including matters before the US Federal Trade Commission and other state and federal government agencies. He has also handled complex arbitration matters.
Prior to joining private practice, Mr. Milne served as a trial attorney with the Antitrust Division of the US Department of Justice, where he participated in civil and criminal investigations and trials in jurisdictions around the country.
Some of Mr. Milne's recent work includes:
- Representing Pfizer in class action litigation accusing the company of delaying entry of generic competition to Lipitor, a major branded drug product.
- Representing Pfizer in class action litigation accusing the company of delaying generic competition to Effexor XR, a major branded drug product.
- Representing the Belarusian Potash Company in a series of antitrust class actions filed in U.S. Federal Courts against U.S. and non-U.S. Potash producers.
- Securing a victory on behalf of Sandoz, Inc. in litigation filed by sanofi-aventis seeking to invalidate approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration of the first generic equivalent to sanofi’s blockbuster biologic drug, Lovenox. The court’s decision allowed Sandoz to continue to sell its product, and vindicated the power of the FDA to approve generic equivalents of complex biological drug products using a flexible scientific approach.
- On behalf of Saudi Aramco, the national oil company of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, securing dismissal of all complaints in In re Refined Petroleum Products Antitrust Litigation, a series of nationwide class actions challenging the activities of OPEC and its members under the U.S. antitrust laws. The decision of the district court was affirmed by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court recently denied certiorari, giving our client a final victory.
- Securing a victory for Experian Information Solutions in litigation filed on behalf of a nationwide class of credit users alleging a conspiracy among major financial institutions, credit reporting agencies and credit scoring companies to fix consumer interest rates. The Western District of Pennsylvania dismissed the complaint, giving our client a complete victory.
- On behalf of Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation securing affirmance by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals of the dismissal of an antitrust action accusing sixteen major international pharmaceutical companies and the largest U.S. pharmaceutical wholesalers of a group boycott in violation of the antitrust laws.
- Securing a jury verdict in favor of Experian Information Solutions, Inc. in Fair Isaac Corporation v. Equifax, et. al., an action brought by FICO the dominant provider of consumer credit risk scoring services, against the three major U.S. credit bureaus alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition in connection with the sale of credit scoring services. The jury also found that FICO committed fraud on the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office in procuring registration of the trademark in suit. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed the jury’s verdict.
- On behalf of Experian Information Solutions, secured dismissal of federal and state antitrust claims lodged by Fair Isaac Corporation in Fair Isaac Corporation v. Equifax, et al. stemming from the formation by the three major U. S. credit bureaus of a competing scoring service. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed the jury’s verdict.
- Securing jury verdict in favor of Sandoz, Inc. in Kaiser Foundation Health Plan v. Abbott Laboratories, et al. an antitrust challenge to a major patent settlement agreement. In that case, Kaiser alleged that an interim settlement between Abbott and Sandoz in connection with a patent dispute had the effect of delaying the entry of lower cost generic competition for one of Abbott's major branded drug products. After a two week trial in Federal District Court in Los Angeles, the jury found that the settlement did not delay the onset of generic competition.
- Representing Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation in continuing opt-out proceedings in In re Brand Name Prescription Drugs Antitrust Litigation. Mr. Milne has represented Novartis Pharmaceuticals (and predecessor entities) in the Brand Name litigation since its inception, including serving as trial counsel in the Company's victory, after a ten week jury trial in the Northern District of Illinois, in the nationwide class action portion of the case.
- Represented Syngenta Seeds, Inc. and Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. in a putative nationwide class action alleging price fixing among the major producers of genetically modified seeds and herbicide products. After a mini-trial on the issues relevant to class certification, the district court denied plaintiffs' motion to certify the case for class action status. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court.
- Representing Sandoz, Inc. in a variety of antitrust matters, including both private litigation and issues involving the federal antitrust agencies. For example, Mr. Milne represented Sandoz in the In re Terazosin Hydrochloride Antitrust Litigation, which involved cutting-edge issues in antitrust and intellectual property law. The matter was a complex, multi-fora proceeding involving multiple groups of private plaintiffs, the Federal Trade Commission and numerous state attorney generals.
- Representing Lek Pharmaceuticals, a Slovenian pharmaceutical manufacturer, in a major monopolization case.
- Representing a consortium of major US and European telecommunications companies in connection with various contemplated business arrangements.
- Securing a victory for Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation in Drug Mart Pharmacy v. American Home Products Corp., et al., barring plaintiff retail drug stores from pursuing conspiracy claims under the Robinson Patman Act against the defendant pharmaceutical manufacturers.
- Serving as trial counsel in two major intercreditor disputes in the bankruptcy proceeding of Adelphia Communications Corporation.
- In the Chapter 11 proceeding of Mirant Corporation -- a major energy company -- Mr. Milne helped represent various Debtor entities in connection with a multi-billion dollar dispute involving a major utility and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
- Representing one of the defendants in litigation accusing numerous corporations of responsibility/complicity in the actions of the apartheid regime in South Africa.