Antitrust Litigation
Read about some of Dr. Chipty's litigation work here:
Sidibe et al. vs. Sutter Health
Dr. Chipty was the antitrust class, liability, and damages expert in Sidibe et al. vs. Sutter. She analyzed issues of hospital market definition, pass through, and the effects of certain contracting practices of Sutter Health in Northern California. Read here the District Court’s 2019 decision certifying a damages class. In March 2022, a jury cleared Sutter of the antitrust allegations, and in April 2022, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the Nineth Circuit Court of Appeals. Read here an overview of the case and issues on appeal.
United States vs. Carolinas Healthcare System
Dr. Chipty was the expert for the United States in the antitrust litigation United States vs. Carolinas Healthcare System (now Atrium Health). She analyzed the competitive effects of Atrium’s use of anti-tiering and anti-steering provisions in contracts with health insurers. Consistent with Dr. Chipty’s opinion, the hospital system reached settlement, on the eve of trial, agreeing it would not enforce or attempt to enforce the challenged contractual provisions to “prohibit, prevent, or penalize Steered Plans or Transparency.” Read the proposed final judgement and the final judgement.
Series of Lawsuits Against Qualcomm
Dr. Chipty was the antitrust expert for Qualcomm in Federal Trade Commission vs. Qualcomm, in Apple v. Qualcomm, and the class case against Qualcomm. In these cases, she studied the issues of market definition, market power, and the use of loyalty discounts used by Qualcomm involving the sale of modem chipsets. Consistent with Dr. Chipty’s opinion, the Nineth Circuit's Decision explained “we do not agree that these agreements had the actual or practical effect of substantially foreclosing competition in the CDMA modem chipset market.” Read a similar finding by the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Behrend vs. Comcast
Dr. Chipty was the antitrust class, liability, and damages expert for Comcast against the Class in a lawsuit challenging Comcast’s acquisition of cable systems and its decision not to license its regional sports network to satellite television providers. Consistent with Dr. Chipty’s opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court (here) found that the Plaintiffs’ damages model was incapable of measuring damages attributable to the challenged conduct, concluding “under the proper standard for evaluating certification, respondents’ model falls far short of establishing that damages are capable of measurement of a classwide basis.”
©2022 by Chipty Economics, LLC