William H. Bave III

Counsel, New York

Biography

Overview

William is an experienced litigator focusing on civil and criminal antitrust litigation, complex business disputes, and government investigations. William has extensive experience representing companies across numerous industries including pharmaceuticals, healthcare, and electronics. William strives to develop innovative strategies for clients to achieve victories at each stage of a litigation. William has been a key member of White & Case trial teams that have successfully defended clients in several multibillion dollar, bet-the-company, price-fixing jury trials.

Bars and Courts
New York State Bar
US District Court for the Southern District of New York
US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Education
JD
Fordham University School of Law
BS
University of Richmond
Languages
English

Experience

Representative cases include the following:

  • Extensive experience with "reverse payment" and "product hopping" pharmaceutical litigation including representation of pharmaceutical manufacturers in class action antitrust challenges to patent settlement agreements and other business arrangements with generic manufacturers.
  • Successful defense of Toshiba in criminal and civil cases involving allegations of price-fixing of LCD panels, resulting in no criminal charges being filed by the DOJ, a verdict finding that Toshiba was not liable following a seven-week jury trial in 2013, and a verdict resulting in no recoverable damages following a six-week class action jury trial in 2012.
  • Representing electronics companies in criminal and civil cases involving allegations of price-fixing in various electronics industries, such as liquid crystal display panels and cathode ray tubes, including with respect to class action and opt-out suits filed in federal court, and tag-along state attorney general actions filed in state court. Successful representation of a multi-national pharmaceutical company in Robinson-Patman Act cases brought by thousands of plaintiffs in the Eastern District of New York.  Prevailed on summary judgment leading to the dismissal of plaintiffs' Robinson-Patman Act claims.