- Demand modeling
- Horizontal and vertical restraints
- Mergers and acquisitions
- Computer hardware and software
- Financial services
- Health insurance
- Investment products
- Medical devices
- Pulp and paper
Scott Thompson specializes in antitrust analysis of mergers and alleged anticompetitive conduct. He has significant methodological expertise and extensive experience using economic models and empirical techniques to assess and quantify predicted effects of proposed mergers, agreements, and single-firm conduct.
Dr. Thompson has an extensive background providing antitrust analysis in support of expert testimony. Prior to joining Bates White, he served at the US Department of Justice for more than 10 years as a staff economist and as Assistant Chief of the Economic Regulatory Section of the Antitrust Division. In that role, Dr. Thompson conducted or supervised the agency′s economic analysis in numerous investigations and cases involving a wide variety of industries including financial markets, consumer products, and healthcare.
Before joining the Antitrust Division, Dr. Thompson served on the faculty of the University of Minnesota, specializing in econometrics.
Worked on behalf of Dr. Oetker to analyze the competitive effects of its proposed acquisition of McCain Foods’ North American frozen pizza business. Submitted analysis to the Competition Bureau of Canada, who cleared the acquisition without the issuance of a supplemental information request.
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 giants.
In two matters, American Airlines v. Sabre and American Airlines v. Travelport, led the team providing support for expert testimony on damages on behalf of American Airlines. The suits, filed in both state and federal courts in Texas, alleged anticompetitive conduct by Sabre and Travelport in the US market for airline ticket booking services. Claims asserted under both the Sherman Act and the Texas Free Enterprise and Antitrust Act alleged that defendants intended to deter American Airlines from using its “direct connect” technology to compete with the defendants’ global distribution services. After one week of trial, American and Sabre settled their disputes. A settlement with Travelport followed soon thereafter.
- On behalf of DuPont, provided economic analysis and expert testimony in a monopolization case related to sales of para-aramid fiber (e.g., Kevlar) in the United States. Kolon, a para-aramid supplier, alleged that the use of certain supply agreements between DuPont and some of its customers was illegal exclusionary conduct under Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Provided expert testimony showing that DuPont is not a monopolist in para-aramid fiber and that the supply agreements at issue are not detrimental to competition. DuPont was granted summary judgment in its favor and Kolon Industries’ antitrust claims were dismissed with prejudice.
- Supported multiple testifying experts retained by counsel for Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) in litigation against Intel, Inc., alleging illegal conduct to maintain a monopoly. Led teams working on issues of market definition, monopoly power, and consumer harm. Led the damages expert support team in the rebuttal phase. Assisted with deposition preparation. Before the case was brought to trial, AMD and Intel agreed to a $1.25 billion settlement that included restrictions on certain business practices.
- Provided economic consulting support to Delta Air Lines and Northwest Airlines in connection with their proposed merger under investigation by the Department of Justice (DOJ). Identified antitrust risks, analyzed price effects, and developed a retrospective merger analysis for the airline industry.
- Supervised the analysis presented to the FTC on the antitrust implications of The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company′s (A&P) proposed acquisition of Pathmark Stores, Inc. on behalf of A&P. Analysis considered the impact of the entry and exit of nearby supermarkets, grocery stores, mass merchandisers, clubs, and other food retailers on prices, margins, and sales. Provided significant assistance to attorneys in responding to second request from the FTC. The FTC ultimately allowed A&P to acquire Pathmark, requiring Pathmark to divest only six of its 141 stores.
- Supported multiple testifying experts on behalf of direct and indirect plaintiffs in In re Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAM) Antitrust Litigation. Served as the lead econometrician and worked closely with the liability expert to write affirmative and rebuttal expert reports and prepare for deposition. Collaborated with counsel throughout the discovery process in preparing interrogatories, document requests, and drafting deposition questions on core economic issues.
- Developed strategy, performed case analysis, assisted with depositions, and reviewed expert reports in United States v. Dentsply International, Inc. Worked extensively with economic experts on empirical analysis and a survey design and analysis. Worked with economic expert to refine and evaluate econometric models used to estimate price and quantity effects of exclusive dealing in the dental supply industry.
- Performed case analysis in United States and Plaintiff States v. Echostar Communications Corp., Hughes Electronic Corp., General Motors Corp., and DirecTV Enterprises, Inc., challenging the proposed merger of satellite television providers DirectTV and Dish Network, the only two nationwide providers of multichannel video programming delivery (MVPD) services at the time. Worked on evaluation of defendant econometric model to assess likelihood of consumer harm with full accounting for claimed cost savings and other efficiencies, and projected quality improvements.
- Developed strategy, performed case analysis, assisted with depositions, and reviewed expert reports in United States v. Visa USA Inc., VISA International Corp, MasterCard International Inc., a monopolization matter.
PhD, Economics, University of Wisconsin
MS, Economics, University of Wisconsin
AB, International Relations, Stanford University
- October 31, 2014
- June 14, 2012
- Bates White supports experts in landmark microprocessor antitrust case: AMD v. Intel settles for $1.25 billionNovember 13, 2009
- December 22, 2008
- March 16, 2011
- February 11, 2011
- Out-of-network involuntary medical care: An analysis of emergency care provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care ActWhite paper, August 31, 2010
- White paper, July 22, 2010
- June 1, 2009
- Case Study: Bates White analysis paves the way for The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company’s acquisition of Pathmark Stores, Inc.January 14, 2008
- Washington, DC, June 7, 2012
- 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 1, 2009