Ashley Bauer has a wide range of experience in federal and state litigation and private arbitration, including antitrust litigation and cartel investigations, white collar criminal defense, and class action litigation.
Ashley's antitrust practice includes regulatory investigations and the civil class action cases that typically follow. She has represented companies in cases involving alleged violations of state and federal antitrust laws brought by direct and indirect purchasers, including claims of:
Price-fixing
Market allocation
Monopolization
Unfair competition
Ashley also has extensive experience as global coordinating counsel on matters involving price-fixing investigations and private damages actions before regulators and courts in the US, Canada, Europe, India, Japan, New Zealand, South Africa, South Korea, Singapore, and Australia.
Ashley is the San Francisco Co-Chair of Latham's Women Enriching Business (WEB) program, and has served as a member of the firm's local Training and Career Enhancement and Mentoring Committees.
Experience
Ashley's experience includes representing:
StarKist Co. in various matters alleging violations of federal and state competition laws, including: three class actions and dozens of direct action claims consolidated in the US District Court for the Southern District of California, alleging price fixing; claims brought by the US DOJ in the Northern District of California; and a lawsuit filed by the State of Washington
Olam Peanut Shelling Company in a class action filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia alleging anticompetitive conduct in the runner peanut market
Kamaya Inc. in class action cases filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California alleging anticompetitive conduct in the linear resistor industry
Nitsuko Electronics Corporation in class action cases filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California alleging price fixing in the film capacitor industry
Singapore Airlines in a class action filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California alleging anticompetitive conduct in the passenger air transport industry
Singapore Airlines Cargo in a class action defense against allegations of anticompetitive conduct in the air cargo industry
An individual indicted for bid-rigging in the US District Court for the Northern District of California
Lundbeck Inc. (formerly Ovation Pharmaceuticals), as trial counsel, in Federal Trade Commission v. Ovation Pharmaceuticals, a merger-to-monopoly case in which the government sought divestiture and over US$100 million in disgorgement. After trial, the district court entered judgment for Lundbeck on all claims. Ashley also represented Lundbeck on appeal. The district court’s decision was affirmed by the 8th Circuit.
A financial services institution in a market manipulation investigation by the DOJ and CFTC
Two consumer goods manufacturers in DOJ bid-rigging and price-fixing investigations
Avery Dennison Corporation in its defense against consumer class action complaints alleging anticompetitive conduct in the labelstock industry
A mining company as trial counsel in an arbitration resulting from an elemental mercury spill in northern Peru
An indigent plaintiff as trial counsel in a civil rights action in the Northern District of California
In the leading competition publication’s annual review of the strongest antitrust practices around the globe, the firm dominated in every category, ranking second across all specialties.
Latham’s Antitrust & Competition Practice provides insight on the current state of enforcement, including more expansive views of what constitutes a cartel, enhanced detection tools, and what to expect next.
Notice: We appreciate your interest in Latham & Watkins. If your inquiry relates to a legal matter and you are not already a current client of the firm, please do not transmit any confidential information to us. Before taking on a representation, we must determine whether we are in a position to assist you and agree on the terms and conditions of engagement with you. Until we have completed such steps, we will not be deemed to have a lawyer-client relationship with you, and will have no duty to keep confidential the information we receive from you. Thank you for your understanding.