- Damages estimation
- Industrial organization
- Joint ventures
- Mergers and acquisitions
- Single-firm conduct
- Banking and financial services
- Consumer products
- Financial services
- Payment cards
George Rozanski has more than 25 years of experience in antitrust analysis. He consults on the competitive effects of mergers and acquisitions and provides antitrust analysis of alleged anticompetitive conduct, including vertical restraints, IP licensing practices, and price-fixing. Dr. Rozanski′s expertise includes the use of econometrics for demand estimation and merger simulation. He has substantial experience analyzing candidate theories of competitive effects in a wide range of industries, both in civil litigation and before US antitrust agencies.
Prior to joining Bates White, Dr. Rozanski served as Chief of the Economic Regulatory Section of the Antitrust Division of the US Department of Justice. In that role, Dr. Rozanski analyzed proposed mergers and acquisitions, single-firm conduct, and proposed changes in economic regulations and legislation that could affect competition and market outcomes. He had responsibility for conducting, supervising, and presenting the agency’s economic analysis in numerous investigations and litigations involving a wide variety of industries, including telecommunications, banking and financial services, intermediate capital goods, differentiated consumer products, Internet music and video distribution services, financial trading platforms, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, steel, defense, and homogeneous manufactured goods.
Dr. Rozanski earned his SB in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology prior to obtaining his MA and PhD in economics from Harvard.
- On behalf of Thermo Fisher Scientific, advised on the likely competitive effects of its proposed $13.6 billion acquisition of Life Technologies. Both firms are global life sciences firms that provide analytical and laboratory services and products. Due to these firms’ global presence, multiple antitrust agencies around the world, including the FTC, reviewed the proposed acquisition. Bates White performed rigorous analyses on horizontal and vertical issues related to the transaction, including a theoretical and empirical analysis of possible vertical effects, based in part on a retrospective study of previous mergers. Bates White also provided consulting support regarding competition issues involved in the European and Chinese investigations of the proposed transaction. The $13.6 billion transaction was approved by all of the relevant competition agencies, after Thermo Fisher agreed to divest three business units to General Electric Company’s health care unit.
- Provided analysis of terms in contracts between American Express and merchants on behalf of American Express. These terms were alleged to be anticompetitive by the United States Department of Justice and several states, as well as by several direct action merchants in two different matters (EDNY 10-CV-04496 and EDNY 11-MD-02221).
- Provided liability and damages analysis for Dupont in its litigation against Monsanto regarding alleged antitrust and intellectual property violations. Monsanto originally sued DuPont and its Pioneer subsidiary for infringing Monsanto’s Roundup Ready soybean patent. DuPont countersued, accusing Monsanto of antitrust violations and of fraudulently obtaining the patent. The parties agreed to dismiss antitrust and patent lawsuits filed against each other as part of a broader licensing agreement reached between the two agricultural biotechnology firms.
- Provided support for expert testimony on damages on behalf of American Airlines in a suit filed in Texas state court. The suit alleged anticompetitive conduct by Sabre in markets for airline ticket booking services. Similar allegations were at issue in a suit filed against Sabre and Travelport in U.S. District Court. After one week of a trial scheduled for two months, American and Sabre settled their dispute in state court and renewed their existing distribution agreement for multiple years. American will receive a monetary settlement and will continue to pursue its direct connect initiative. Settlement was also reached in U.S. District Court.
- On behalf of Constellation Brands, analyzed the competitive effects of Anheuser-Busch InBev and Grupo Modelo’s proposed divestiture of brewery and distribution assets to Constellation in response to DOJ's concerns about their proposed merger. DOJ ultimately accepted the proposed divestiture package and approved the merger.
- Conducted extensive economic analysis on behalf of Express Scripts in connection with its $29 billion acquisition of Medco Health Solutions. The analysis, which was presented to the Federal Trade Commission as well as state enforcement agencies, showed adverse competitive effects were unlikely in any relevant market. Bid data were used both to investigate the current structure of competition and to calibrate merger simulation models that demonstrated there would be no unilateral incentive to increase price after accounting for anticipated efficiencies. The analysis also addressed possible coordinated effects and monopsony concerns. The FTC unconditionally approved the merger after an eight month investigation, finding no likelihood of unilateral effects, coordinated effects, or exercise of monopsony power.
- In the matter National Community Pharmacists Assoc. v. Express Scripts, Inc., a private challenge to the April 2012 merger of Express Scripts and Medco, filed a declaration in U.S. District Court arguing that the merger did not lead to anticompetitive effects in any relevant market, and that plaintiff’s expert had misunderstood the nature of competition in the Pharmacy Benefit Management (“PBM”) market in claiming that it did. The NCPA had filed suit in March 2012, four days before the parties announced the closure of the merger following an eight month FTC investigation, to enjoin the merger, alleging antitrust violations of Section 7 of the Clayton Act. The initial complaint was dismissed without prejudice and then plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in September 2012 that was dismissed with prejudice in June 2013.
- Provided analysis on behalf of Grifols in connection with its acquisition of Talecris, two companies involved in the manufacture and sale of plasma-derived therapies used to treat a range of conditions, such as immune system diseases and bleeding disorders. Evaluated possible coordinated effects concerns related to the merger and assessed the merger specificity of claimed efficiencies in analysis presented to FTC. FTC approved the Grifols/Talecris transaction after Grifols agreed to a consent decree with provisions to facilitate entry.
- In Omnicare v. United Health, served as a testifying expert for United Health to assess damages in a lawsuit alleging that premerger coordination led to the joint exercise of monopsony power. Performed rigorous econometric analysis to simulate but-for pricing and estimate total damages for a range of but-for scenarios. Analysis revealed premerger coordination likely would not have a significant impact.
- Provided analysis to Delta Air Lines and Northwest Airlines in connection with their proposed merger which was under investigation by DOJ. Identified antitrust risks, conducted a retrospective merger analysis on the airline industry, and coauthored a white paper that analyzed likely merger price effects and that was presented to DOJ.
- October 31, 2014
- February 21, 2014
- May 2013
- February 23, 2012
- February 17, 2012
- Bates White named as one of the world's leading competition economics firms by Global Competition ReviewFebruary 5, 2010
- Bates White supports experts in landmark microprocessor antitrust case: AMD v. Intel settles for $1.25 billionNovember 13, 2009
- December 22, 2008
- Bates White provides analysis to DOJ and European Commission concerning the Google-Yahoo! online search advertising agreementDecember 8, 2008
- October 2012
- December 2011
- December 2011
- March 16, 2011
- February 11, 2011
- White paper, July 22, 2010
- Comments submitted to FTC and DOJJune 3, 2010
- November 12, 2009
- Comments submitted to FTC and DOJNovember 9, 2009
- Washington, DC, June 7, 2012
- Washington, DC, March 29, 2012
- Washington, DC, June 6, 2011
- Washington, DC, March 30, 2011 – April 1, 2011
- Randal Heeb, George Rozanski, and Scott Thompson speak about lessons from AMD v. Intel for counseling clientsNew York, NY, March 16, 2011
- Washington, DC, June 7, 2010
- George Rozanski speaks at ABA Section of Antitrust Law panel discussion on complex financial instrumentsWashington, DC, May 17, 2010
- George Rozanski speaks at ABA Antitrust Law brown bag on litigating a minimum resale price maintenance caseWashington, DC, October 21, 2009
- Washington, DC, June 1, 2009