415.795.2050
info@fbjgk.com
Farmer Brownstein Jaeger Goldstein Klein & Siegel LLPFarmer Brownstein Jaeger Goldstein Klein & Siegel LLPFarmer Brownstein Jaeger Goldstein Klein & Siegel LLPFarmer Brownstein Jaeger Goldstein Klein & Siegel LLP
  • Home
  • Our Practice
    • Resources
  • Attorneys
    • William S. Farmer
    • David C. Brownstein
    • Charles R. Jaeger
    • David M. Goldstein
    • Kerry C. Klein
    • Marc Siegel
  • Clients
  • News
  • Contact Us

David M. Goldstein

  • William S. Farmer
  • David C. Brownstein
  • Charles R. Jaeger
  • David M. Goldstein
  • Kerry C. Klein
  • Marc Siegel
Home Attorneys David M. Goldstein

Practice

david goldsteinDavid has represented clients in demanding business litigation matters, including class actions and multidistrict litigation, for more than 25 years. He has broad experience as both a defendant and a plaintiff in complex litigation in federal and state courts, as well as in arbitrations. For the past 20 years, much of his practice has focused on antitrust and competition matters involving cartels, dominant firms and monopolization, vertical relationships, antitrust/IP matters, and other areas of antitrust law. He often provides guidance to clients regarding antitrust issues involving pricing and distribution, vertical agreements, trade association activities, and licensing agreements. He has handled cases and counseled clients in a broad range of industries, including, for example, electronic devices and components, chemicals, entertainment, health care, pharmaceuticals, clothing, payment cards, credit reports/identity theft, DSL technology, LED lighting, motor oil, and medical devices. In addition to antitrust matters, David has represented clients in business disputes involving contracts, business torts, California’s Unfair Competition Law, investor disputes, real estate, and other matters.

David is ranked in Chambers for Antitrust in California, has been recommended in The Legal 500 for the United States in Antitrust, is a Benchmark Litigation California Star in Antitrust, and has been a Northern California Super Lawyer in antitrust every year since 2006. He has a peer- and judiciary-reviewed AV Preeminent rating from Martindale-Hubbell.

David served as the Chair of the Executive Committee of the California Lawyers Association’s Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section. His other positions include Immediate Past Chair, Secretary, and Chair of Media, Marketing and Membership. He served for many years on the Executive Committee of the Antitrust Section of the Bar Association of San Francisco (BASF), and he served as the Vice Chair of the Antitrust Section in 2010-2011. He also served on BASF’s Litigation Section’s Executive Committee for several years including as the Chair in 2009. He previously served on the Editorial Board of San Francisco Attorney Magazine and as the Editor of the Barrister’s Club Law Journal.

David often writes and speaks about antitrust and litigation issues. He co-authored “DOJ and FTC Set Possible Criminal Liability Trap for HR Professionals,” which won an Antitrust Writing Award from Concurrences, and “Putting China’s Fair Competition Review System in Action,” which was nominated for an Antitrust Writing Award.

Prior to joining the firm, David was a partner at Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP from 2008-2018, and before that was a shareholder at Heller Ehrman LLP, where he served as a co-chair of the Antitrust Practice Group, as a co-chair of the San Francisco Litigation Department, and as a member of the San Francisco Management Committee.

david-goldstein-chambers

David M. Goldstein
Partner

dgoldstein@fbjgk.com
415.962.2875 Direct
415.520.5678 Fax

155 Montgomery Street, Suite 301
San Francisco, CA 94104

Download V-Card

David Goldstein is highlighted for his broad litigation practice and his abilities at the intersection of antitrust and IP.  He is well placed to handle significant litigation concerning allegations of monopolistic conduct, price-fixing and cartel behavior.

“David is a very well-rounded and strategic lawyer.”

“David has a calm wisdom. He gives clients outstanding advice.”

“He is very responsible and always provides the right solution to our company.”

Education

Yale Law School
Executive Editor, Yale Journal on Regulation
University of Michigan, B.A., with high distinction

Admitted

California

Member

American Bar Association (Litigation, Antitrust and Intellectual Property Sections)
State Bar of California (Litigation, Antitrust and Intellectual Property Sections)

Representative Engagements

General Litigation Matters:

  • Sony Electronics and Sony PlayStation. Represented Sony as a plaintiff in a breach of contract case involving a mediated settlement agreement.  Sony v. HannStar, 835 F.3d 1155 (9th 2016).
  • Delta Dental of California. Defended Delta Dental in an arbitration and a follow-on class action alleging breach of contract and other claims.
  • Investor: Representing investor in start-up company in litigation involving breach of contract and breach of fiduciary claims.
  • Start-up Company.  Representing company in litigation with investors involving breach of contract and fraud claims.
  • Technology Company.  Representing technology company in litigation/arbitration involving fraud and breach of fiduciary claims.
  • Real Estate Company. Represented owner of real estate in a three-week arbitration to determine the fair market rent for a property in Silicon Valley.
  • Real Estate Company. Representing company in dispute with clients regarding real estate construction project.

Cartels:

  • Japanese Chemical Manufacturer. Defending company in class action against allegations of price-fixing and market allocation.
  • Taiwanese Electronic Components Manufacturer. Advising company in a price-fixing class action.
  • Sony Pictures. Defended Sony in alleged no-poach and wage-suppression class action.
  • Sony Electronics. Defended Sony in direct and indirect purchaser class actions alleging price fixing with respect to SRAM chips.
  • Sony Electronics and Sony PlayStation. Asserted claims for Sony in price-fixing case involving TFT-LCD panels.
  • Merck. Advised Merck in California Supreme Court proceedings in alleged price-fixing class action.
  • Copper Tubing Manufacturer. Defended German manufacturer of copper tubing in price-fixing class action.

Antitrust/Intellectual Property:

  • Japanese Electronics Products Manufacturer.  Advised company on antitrust issues in the context of a patent pool.
  • Texas Instruments. Defended Texas Instruments against Section 2 antitrust counterclaims based on standards-setting for DSL technology.
  • nVidia. Represented nVidia in asserting Section 2 antitrust counterclaims based on Rambus’ conduct before a standards-setting organization.
  • One Technologies. Represented One Technologies in asserting Section 2 antitrust counterclaims in a trademark infringement case involving Google AdWords.
  • Electronics Products Manufacturer. Advised company regarding possible antitrust claims based on a patent pool.

Dominant Firms and Monopolization:

  •  Sidibe v. Sutter Health. Representing plaintiffs asserting tying and monopolization claims against health care system.
  • Visa. Defended Visa in a purported U.S. $100 billion class action brought by Wal-Mart and other merchants asserting tying and attempted monopolization claims based on Visa’s payment card rules, In re Visa Check/MasterMoney Antitrust Litigation.
  • Visa. Defended Visa in 40 indirect purchaser class actions in more than 20 states asserting monopolization, consumer protection, and common law claims in follow-on cases to In re Visa Check/MasterMoney Antitrust Litigation.
  • Merck. Defended Merck against Section 2 antitrust counterclaims in a Hatch-Waxman case involving cholesterol drugs.
  • Pennzoil-Quaker State. Defended Pennzoil-Quaker State in a challenge to the merger of the two companies.

Publications

  • “Court Applies Rule of Reason to Grant Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings to Dismiss Challenge to McDonald’s No-Solicitation and No-Hire Provision,”
    California Lawyers Association, July/August 2022
  • “7th Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment for Defendants in Containerboard Price-Fixing Case,”
    California Lawyers Association, January 2019
  • “Ninth Circuit Holds That State-Action Immunity Does Not Preempt Section I Challenge to Seattle Ordinance Authorizing Collective Price Negotiations by For-Hire Drivers for Uber and Lyft,”
    California Lawyers Association, July 2018
  • “DOJ and FTC Set Possible Criminal Liability Trap for HR Professionals,”
    AntitrustWatch.com, October 2017
  • “Intellectual Ventures Wins Summary Judgment to Defeat Capital One’s Antitrust Counterclaims,”
    State Bar of California, Antitrust Section E-Brief, January 2018
  • “Putting China’s Fair Competition Review System Into Action,”
     Law360, December 4, 2017
  • “Southern District of California Issues State Law Motion to Dismiss Rulings in In re Packaged Seafood Products Antitrust Litigation,”
    State Bar of California, Antitrust Section E-Brief, May 2017
  • “FTC and DOJ Antitrust Division Request Comments on Proposed Revisions to Antitrust Guidelines for Licensing IP,”
     iPFrontline, Aug. 24, 2016.
  • “Recent Developments in the Extraterritorial Application of the US Antitrust Laws,”
     JCA Journal, ISSN 03863042, March and May, 2015. Japanese Version
  • “Clarity and Confusion: FTAIA Developments in 2014,”
     Law360, 16, 2015.
  • “Civil Price-Fixing Cases in EU vs. U.S.: 10 Key Issues,”
     Law360, June 11, 2014.
  • “A Year Later: Comcast’s Impact on Antitrust Class Actions,”
     Law360, March 26, 2014.
  • “The Impact of Comcast Corp. v. Behrend on Securities Class Actions,”
     Securities Reform Act Litigation Reporter, April & May 2013.

  • “Northern District of California Dismisses No Poach Case Against LG and Samsung,” California Lawyers Association, October 2018
  • “Second Circuit Holds that Uber’s Arbitration Agreement with Its Users Is Enforceable Under California Law,” State Bar of California, Antitrust Section E-Brief, September 2017
  • “Ninth Circuit Holds That the Collateral-Order Doctrine Does Not Allow an Interlocutory Appeal of a Denial of a Motion to Dismiss Based on State-Action Immunity,” State Bar of California, Antitrust Section E-Brief, June 2017
  • “Deciphering RJR Nabisco’s ‘Domestic Injury’ Requirement’,” Law360, Jan. 5, 2017.
  • “District Court Certifies Class of Direct Purchasers of Mushrooms in Rule of Reason Price-Fixing Case,” State Bar of California, Antitrust Section E-Brief, Jan. 2017.
  • “Cathode Ray Tube Court Rules that ‘Price-Ladder’ Damages Are Analytically Different From ‘Umbrella Damages,’” State Bar of California, Antitrust Section E-Brief, 2016.
  • “Takeaways from the High Court’s New Rule on RICO’s Reach,” Law360, June 22, 2016.
  • “Quo Vadis FTC: The Meaning of the FTC Case Against Endo,” Law360, April 25, 2016.
  • “1st Circuit Charts Conservative Post-Actavis Course in Loestrin,” Law360, Feb. 26, 2016.
  • “Eight Product-Hopping Takeaways from Namenda Ruling,” Law 360, June 11, 2015.
  • “2d Circuit’s Decision in Lotes Clarifies FTAIA’s Effect on Extraterritorial Reach of the Sherman Act, But Leaves Unresolved the Status of Claims Based on Importation of Products Containing Price-Fixed Components,” JD Supra Business Advisor, June 5, 2014.
  • “Clarifying Obligation To Report Drug Patent Agreements,” Law360, June 7, 2011.

+ Read more

Speeches and Panels

  • “Latest Development in No-Poach Agreements,” California Lawyers Association, Jan. 29, 2019.
  • “Antitrust for HR Employees: No-Poach and Wage-Fixing Agreements,” Bar Association of San Francisco, Jan. 16, 2018.
  • “Strategies to Minimize Legal Risk and Increase Enforceability of Non-Solicitation Agreements,” Client Webinar, Feb. 1, 2017.
  • “Practical Aspects of Law Firm Conflicts: What Every In-House Lawyer Should Know,” Commercial Law WebAdvisor, Jan. 14, 2016.
  • “Antitrust Issues in Licensing Intellectual Property Rights,” Bar Association of San Francisco, Sept. 29, 2015.
  • “Lawyering 101: Taking and Defending Depositions,” Bar Association of San Francisco, Nov. 7, 2014.
  • “A View from the Trenches in Today’s Complex Antitrust Cases,” Bar Association of San Francisco, Nov. 29, 2012.
  • “Licensing and Antitrust,” UC Davis Law School, Feb. 23, 2012.

  • “The Role of Antitrust in Analyzing Patent Misuse,” Antitrust Issues for Silicon Valley Companies, July 28, 2010.
  • “Current Trends and Issues in Antitrust,” The Rock Center for Corporate Governance, Stanford Law School, Jan. 15, 2010.
  • “Section 17200 Update After In re Tobacco II Cases,” Bar Association of San Francisco, Aug. 5, 2009.
  • “Antitrust Issues in Licensing Intellectual Property,” Licensing Executives Society, San Diego, March 18, 2008.
  • “Current Antitrust Issues in Standards-Setting and Licensing,” Stanford University, Jan. 9, 2008.

+ Read more

Farmer Brownstein Jaeger Goldstein Klein & Siegel LLP
info@fbjgk.com
415.795.2050 Main
415.520.5678 Fax

155 Montgomery Street, Suite 301
San Francisco, CA 94104

 
Chambers 2023
Leading Firms
2023
Copyright 2021 Farmer Brownstein Jaeger Goldstein Klein & Siegel LLP | All Rights Reserved
  • Home
  • Our Practice
    • Resources
  • Attorneys
    • William S. Farmer
    • David C. Brownstein
    • Charles R. Jaeger
    • David M. Goldstein
    • Kerry C. Klein
    • Marc Siegel
  • Clients
  • News
  • Contact Us
Farmer Brownstein Jaeger Goldstein Klein & Siegel LLP