Our Practice

In re DRAM Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 1486 (N.D. Cal.
and multiple state court actions):

Gustafson Gluek was appointed co-lead counsel for the indirect purchasers in this nationwide class action against both national and international memory-chip manufacturers.  This case dealt with the conspiracy surrounding the pricing of the memory chips commonly known as Dynamic Random Access Memory (or DRAM).  DRAM is used in thousands of devices on a daily basis, and Gustafson Gluek has been integral in achieving what is to date, one of the largest settlements on behalf of indirect purchasers in history.    

In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Litigation, MDL No. 1720 (E.D.N.Y.)

Gustafson Gluek is a member of the executive committee working on this national antitrust class action against numerous financial institutions involved in the determination of the fees required to use credit cards at retail establishments. 

Precision Associates, Inc., et al. v. Panalpina World Transport (Holding) Ltd., et al.:

Gustafson Gluek is one of four interim co-lead counsel representing direct purchasers of U.S. Freight Forwarding Services. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants engaged in an international conspiracy to fix, inflate, and maintain new charges or prices for U.S. Freight Forwarding Services in violation of the antitrust laws. The case in currently pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Augmentin:

Gustafson Gluek was one of the counsel representing direct purchasers of Augmentin® against GlaxoSmithKline alleging that GSK violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by unlawfully maintaining its monopoly over Augmentin® and preventing entry of generic equivalents. Specifically, Plaintiffs allege that GSK misled the United States Patent and Trademark Office resulting in the issuance of invalid patents that purportedly protected Augmentin®. Plaintiffs allege that these invalid patents prevented generic manufacturers from bringing less expensive generic versions of Augmentin® to market. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiffs and the Class members paid more for Augmentin® than they would have in the absence of the alleged anticompetitive conduct. This case ultimately settled for tens of millions of dollars for the direct purchasers of Augmentin®.

In re: Monosodium Glutamate Antitrust Litigation:

Dan Gustafson, senior partner and co-founder of Gustafson Gluek, was appointed as one of the Co-Lead Counsel in this MDL while a partner at his former firm. The claims arising in this MDL alleged that Defendants engaged in a continuing agreement, understanding and conspiracy in restraint of trade to artificially raise, fix, maintain and/or stabilize the prices for MSG and Nucleotides throughout the United States. Mr. Gustafson, in his capacity as Co-Lead Counsel represented direct purchasers of MSG and Nucleotides. After surviving motions for summary judgment brought by defendants, the case ultimately settled for over 120 million dollars., which was approved by the District of Minnesota.

Higgins v. Archer-Daniels Midland:

Gustafson Gluek was one of the counsel representing indirect purchasers of MSG and Nucleotides in various states throughout the country. Plaintiffs’ claims arose from allegations that Defendants engaged in a continuing agreement, understanding and conspiracy in restraint of trade to artificially raise, fix, maintain and/or stabilize the prices for MSG and Nucleotides throughout the United States. After suing the defendants in various state courts throughout the country, counsel for the Plaintiffs eventually reached a settlement for indirect purchases in twenty-four different states or U.S. territories. As part of the Settlement, which was approved in the Second Judicial District, New Mexico, defendants agreed to pay over 39 million dollars to resolve Plaintiffs’ claims.

Budget Rent a Car:

The firm recently represented a class in a case against Budget Rent a Car that settled on terms very favorable to the class. Plaintiffs alleged that Budget unfairly and without notice charged renters more money (in many instances hundreds of dollars more) for bringing their car back early. After Gustafson Gluek helped get a class certified and won a summary adjudication motion, Budget agreed to return 100% of the overcharges – in cash – to each renter and to clearly disclose its practices going forward.

Yarrington, et al. v. Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc:

Gustafson Gluek was one of two firms appointed Co-Lead Counsel by the U.S. District Court in Minnesota to represent those persons who purchased and ingested Estratest and Estratest H.S., hormone replacement therapy drugs, after March 8, 1998 in all states except California. Plaintiffs alleged that Defendant falsely and deceptively advertised the drugs as being “FDA-approved.” Following nearly six years of hard-fought litigation, Defendant agreed to pay $16.5 million, which allowed class members to recover 100% of their claimed damages.

 In Re: Sigg Switzerland (USA), Inc. Aluminum Bottles Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, MDL No. 2137:

Gustafson Gluek is currently serving on the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for In Re: Sigg Switzerland (USA), Inc. Aluminum Bottles Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation.  This case is a multidistrict class action alleging that SIGG Switzerland (USA), Inc. falsely marketed its reusable aluminum bottles as free of Bisphenol-A (“BPA”).

In Re Medtronic, Inc. Implantable Defibrillators Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 1726:

Gustafson Gluek was appointed one of two Co-Lead Counsel in this significant Mass Tort MDL (consolidated in the District of Minnesota) against Medtronic, Inc. The claims arising in this MDL related to certain of Medtronic’s implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-Ds) that contained serious battery defects, which resulted in a recall of the products at issue. Plaintiff alleged that Medtronic, Inc. intentionally withheld important information from the FDA and the public and continued to sell the fevices for implantation into patients facing life-threatening heart conditions. Plaintiffs alleged that Medtronic’s disregard for safety resulted in a significant public health crisis ultimately resulting in the recall of approximately 87,000 Devices. Gustafson Gluek was appointed one of two co-lead counsel in the case. After surviving a motion for summary judgment and various motions to dismiss brought by defendants, the cases in the MDL ultimately settled for approximately 100 million dollars plus a payment of 18 million dollars in attorneys’ fees. Given its role as co-lead counsel, Gustafson Gluek had a significant role in all aspects of the case.

In Re: Medtronic, Inc., Sprint Fidelis Leads Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 1905:

Gustafson Gluek was appointed sole Lead Counsel in this significant Mass Tort MDL (consolidated in the District of Minnesota) against Medtronic, Inc. The claims arising in this MDL related to Medtronic’s Sprint Fidelis Leads that contained serious defects that cause the leads to fracture and unnecessarily shock people in whom they are implanted. This defect resulted in a recall of the products at issue. Plaintiff alleged that Medtronic, Inc. intentionally withheld important information from the FDA and the public and continued to sell the devices for implantation into patients facing life-threatening heart conditions. Plaintiffs alleged that Medtronic’s disregard for safety resulted in a significant public health crisis ultimately resulting in the recall of the devices. There were approximately 250,000 of these devices sold. Although the complaint was dismissed at the district court based primarily on preemption related issues, the case is now pending at the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiffs are cautiously optimistic about the possibility of reversal of the district court’s dismissal order. Related cases were also filed in Minnesota State Court. Representative cases in the state court were also dismissed on preemption grounds and are currently pending before the Minnesota Court of Appeals.

In re St. Paul Travelers Securities Litigation I and II (D. Minn.):

Gustafson Gluek, served as liaison counsel in both of the St. Paul Travelers Securities Litigations. At issue in the cases were public statements as well as material omissions St. Paul Travelers made that negatively impacted the stock prices of the Company. On behalf of New Mexico State Funds, Gustafson Gluek worked to litigate the two separate class actions against St. Paul Travelers, resulting in multi-million dollar settlements.

KBA Giori, North America, Inc. etal. v. Muhlbauer, Inc., et al.

This is a patent infringement case in which Gustafson Gluek was one of the counsel representing the plaintiff, KBA-Giori against Muhlbauer, Inc. There were several cases involving these two parties and the technology employed by the patents at issue is generally used in commercial printing presses and related equipment.. The first case that Gustafson Gluek was involved in went to trial October 2009 and the jury found infringement of the patent by the Defendants and awarded reasonable royalty damages to our client.

Spine Solutions, Inc., etal. v. Medtronic Sofamore Danek, Inc., et al.

This is a patent infringement case in which Gustafson Gluek was one of the counsel representing the plaintiff, Spine Solutions, Inc., Synthes Spine So., L.P.P., and Synthes, Inc. against Medtronic Safamor Danek, Inc. and Medtronic Sofamor Donek, USA. The patent at issue in that case involved technology relating to spinal disc implants. This case went to trial in November 2008 and a jury verdict was returned in favor of our client. The jury found willful infringements and awarded both lost profits and reasonable royalty damages to our client. There are various post-trial motions and likely will be an appeal of the jury verdict.