Richard Langford, PhD

Rich Langford is a Manager in the Antitrust and Competition Practice at Bates White. He has significant experience conducting quantitative and qualitative analyses in support of expert economic testimony, including pricing analysis and market research. He has also done extensive research in industrial organization and applied econometrics, primarily focused on the automobile industry.

PhD, Economics, Yale University

BA, Economics and Mathematics (with general and departmental honors, Phi Beta Kappa), Vassar College

• In United States et al. v. Google LLC, supported the expert in report and deposition and trial preparation on behalf of the Department of Justice, which alleged that Google foreclosed competition for internet search by denying general search engine competitors access to vital distribution channels and scale, thereby thwarting innovation and harming consumers and advertisers.
• In Anthony Oliver et al. v. American Express Company et al., supported experts on behalf of Amex.  Conducted data analyses relevant to issues of common impact and damages for a class certification hearing.
• On behalf of the debtor in In re Bestwall LLC, led teams in processing and analysis of mesothelioma claims data.
• On behalf of Evonik and PeroxyChem, two North American manufacturers of hydrogen peroxide, supported Dr. Nicholas Hill. Evonik prevailed in its litigation against the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
• Supported the expert in the joint venture of Peabody Energy Corporation and Arch Resources, two North American companies seeking to combine coal assets, on behalf of the FTC’s efforts to block the transaction. 
• On behalf of Apple in its litigation against Qualcomm, constructed and analyzed theoretical and empirical structural models to help the expert understand how the modem chipset industry operated and to model Qualcomm’s impact on the industry. 
• In the matter ACCC v. Informed Sources, provided economic analysis on behalf of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in its Federal Court of Australia proceedings against Informed Sources. Analyzed whether the retail gasoline price information provided by Informed Sources to fuel retailers that subscribed to the service likely lessened competition in metropolitan Melbourne.