Biography
Daniel Grossbaum is an associate in White & Case's New York office and a member of the Firm's Global Competition and Antitrust Group. Dan's practice focuses on complex antitrust matters, commercial matters, and counselling, and he regularly represents global companies on novel antitrust and intellectual property issues.
Dan has experience in all stages of litigation, from pre-complaint investigations to Supreme Court appellate briefing. In addition to his significant litigation experience, he is also a trusted advisor to some of the largest companies in the world where he routinely counsels clients in pre- and non-litigation matters.
Dan is also a member of the Firm's Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Global Industry Group and has substantial expertise in in the pharmaceutical and healthcare industries. He has routinely written and spoken on pharmaceutical antitrust matters, where his articles have been shortlisted for awards multiple times.
Mr. Grossbaum also maintains an active pro bono practice, with a particular focus on education-related matters.
Mr. Grossbaum graduated from New York University School of law cum laude in 2016, where he served as managing editor of the New York University Environmental Law Journal.
Experience
Substantial experience with "reverse payment," Walker Process fraud, and "product hopping" pharmaceutical litigation. Among this experience includes significant work with experts regarding liability and class certification issues, work on motions for summary judgment as well as oppositions to motions for class certification involving both indirect and direct purchaser proposed classes.
Representing global pharmaceutical manufacturer in lawsuit alleging Walker Process fraud and a year’s long conspiracy designed to limit available anti-VEGF treatments.
Represented AbbVie (and predecessor companies Allergan and Forest Laboratories) in class action litigations over Alzheimer's drug Namenda. Obtained summary judgment of all "hard switch" allegations and all claims by consumers from the case.
Represented Gilead in complex antitrust class action litigation challenging joint-venture agreements, patent settlements, and product-development and marketing decisions related to various of Gilead's leading HIV treatments and secured summary judgment on plaintiffs' product hopping claims.
Represented Warner Chilcott and Watson in pharmaceutical antitrust class action, In re Loestrin 24 Fe Antitrust Litigation (D.R.I.). Claims included challenges to patent settlement agreements and claims of fraud on the Patent Office and so-called "product hopping." Cut nearly US$2 billion in exposure by obtaining: dismissal of one of two challenged settlement agreements, denial of certification of consumer class and dismissal of various state law claims. Resolved case on eve of trial.
Representing Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. (PDVSA) and a number of its subsidiaries and affiliates in litigations in multiple federal district and appellate courts arising under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, and various state laws.
On-site antitrust counsel for a leading oil & gas trade association providing antitrust advice to association members on appropriate topics for discussion.
Represented a wireless telecom company in its dispute involving an upstream supplier’s anticompetitive leveraging of market power to foreclose competition and systematically disadvantage downstream purchasers.
Primary drafter and counsel for multiple amici before the Supreme Court of the United States.
Representing Anthem, Inc. in its defense at trial and on appeal against claims brought by the US Department of Justice to block Anthem's US$54 billion acquisition of Cigna Corporation.
Counsel for US subsidiary of global shipping company in criminal grand jury investigation by Department of Justice Antitrust Division.
New York Super Lawyers, Antitrust Litigation "Rising Star" (2020-2025)
NYSBA, Empire State Counsel (2017)
Dreamin' of Entering a Patent Settlement Agreement in California? What to Know About California's Reverse Payment Law (2025)
A Decade of FTC v. Actavis: The Reverse Payment Framework Is Older, But Are Courts Wiser in Applying It (2024)
FTC v. Actavis and Pricing Practices Spearhead Rise in US Pharmaceutical Antitrust Cases (2024)
The Inefficient Treatment of the Efficiencies Defense (2023)
Third Circuit: Pharmaceutical Cases (2021)
California's New Reverse Payment Law Departs from Supreme Court Standard in FTC v. Actavis (2019)
Impact of the CARES Act on the Medical Device Industry (2020)
Impact of the CARES Act on the Pharmaceutical and Medical Devices Industries (2020)
