J. Clayton "Clay" Everett, Jr.

Partner 合伙人

J. Clayton "Clay" Everett, Jr. is a partner in Morgan Lewis's Antitrust Practice. Mr. Everett's practice spans a wide range of antitrust matters, from civil and criminal antitrust litigation, to merger and non-merger investigations before the FTC and DOJ, to counseling clients in diverse industries on a wide variety of practices. In 2012, he was one of five lawyers in the United States recognized by Law360 as a "Rising Star" in the field of Antitrust Law.

Mr. Everett has represented clients in more than 100 antitrust class actions. Representative matters include:

• In re Vitamins Antitrust Litigation, MDL-1285 (D.D.C.) - represented a multinational chemical company defending more than 100 class action cases in federal and state courts alleging that prices were fixed for various vitamin products. Cases settled on favorable terms.
• In re Methionine Antitrust Litigation, MDL-1311 (N.D. Cal.) - represented a multinational chemical company defending a series of class action cases in federal and state courts alleging a price-fixing conspiracy in relation to the chemical methionine. Defeated certification of a nationwide class of indirect purchasers. Remaining cases settled on favorable terms.
• Sniado v. Bank Austria AG, et al., (S.D.N.Y.) - represented Austrian bank defending a class action case alleging that foreign exchange fees were fixed. Case was dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and the dismissal was upheld in the Second Circuit and Supreme Court of the United States.
• Empagran, SA. v. F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd., (D.D.C.) - represented a multinational chemical company in defending claims brought by foreign purchasers of vitamins. Case was dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and the dismissal was ultimately appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court's decision upholding the dismissal establishes the standard under the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act for the exercise of jurisdiction over claims based on purchases outside the United States.
• In re Children's Ibuprofen Antitrust Litigation, (D.D.C.) - represented a pharmaceutical manufacturer defending class action alleging that a pre-suit patent settlement constituted a market allocation agreement. Cases settled while motions to dismiss were pending.
• In re Methyl-Methacrylate Antitrust Litigation, MDL-1768 (E.D. Pa.) - represented a multinational chemical company in a series of class action cases alleging a conspiracy to fix prices of methyl-methacrylate and polymethyl-methacrylate. Indirect purchaser class action was was dismissed with prejudice. Direct purchaser cases settled on favorable terms after initial complaints were dismissed without prejudice.
• In re Pharmaceutical Industry Average Wholesale Price Litigation, MDL-1456 (D. Mass.) - represents a pharmaceutical manufacturer defending class action claims in federal and state courts and various actions brought by state attorneys' general. Class claims settled on favorable terms after class certification decision significantly narrowed the scope of the litigated claims. State attorney general claims continue in litigation.
• In re Air Cargo Antitrust Litigation, MDL-1715 (E.D.N.Y.) - represented an Asian airline in defending class action claims that air cargo rates were fixed. State law indirect purchaser claims and claims brought under foreign law were dismissed by the court.
• In re Korean Air Lines Co., Ltd. Antitrust Litigation, MDL-1891 (C.D. Cal.) - represented an Asian airline defending class action claims that air passenger rates were fixed. State law claims and claims by foreign purchasers were dismissed.
• In re Fasteners Antitrust Litigation, MDL-1912 (E.D. Pa.) - represents a Japanese manufacturer of zippers, snaps and buttons defending class action claims alleging that prices for fastener products were fixed.
• In re TFT-LCD Antitrust Litigation, MDL-1827 (N.D. Cal.) - represents a Japanese electronics company defending class action and opt out claims that prices for TFT-LCD products were fixed.
• In re Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, MDL 1917---represents a Japanese electronics manufacturer in defending class and opt out actions alleging that prices for cathode ray tubes were fixed.

Mr. Everett's practice also has a particular focus on counseling and litigating issues at the intersection of antitrust and intellectual property law. He has represented plaintiffs and defendants in antitrust counterclaims asserted in patent litigation and has written and spoken extensively on the application of the U.S. antitrust laws to the acquisition, licensing, and enforcement of intellectual property rights. In 2003, Mr. Everett co-chaired the ABA Section of Antitrust Law's Holmes Group Task Force: Status Report on Developments Relating to the Jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Mr. Everett also maintains an active practice before the FTC and the U.S. Department of Justice, representing clients in criminal and civil investigations and securing approval of mergers and acquisitions.

Mr. Everett has served in the leadership of the American Bar Association's Section of Antitrust Law. He currently serves on the Editorial Board for the State Antitrust Practice and Statutes and  previously was a member of the Editorial Board for Antitrust Law Developments Annual Update publication. In addition, Mr. Everett served both as Chair's Assistant and the Chair-Elect's Assistant for the Section of Antitrust Law.

Mr. Everett is admitted to practice in the District of Columbia and before various federal courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States.