- Charlotte
- Chicago
- Los Angeles
- New York
- Newark
- San Francisco
- Washington, D.C.
- Geneva
- London
- Moscow
- Paris

Home > Attorneys > Attorneys > Neal R. Marder > Matters

Neal R. Marder, Partner

Chair, Los Angeles Litigation Department

Los Angeles Office

T: +1 (213) 615-1728

Email | Download v-Card


In re K-Dur Antitrust Litigation Wyeth We recently won summary judgment in an antitrust class action against our client, Wyeth (Pfizer), which brought to an end nearly a decade of related federal and state cases in which the plaintiffs had challenged Wyeth's settlement of a patent lawsuit relating to a patented potassium chloride product called K-Dur. In the antitrust litigation, plaintiffs alleged that the patent settlement between our client and Schering-Plough Corporation had anti-competitive effects and resulted in their paying more for K-Dur and other potassium chloride supplements than they otherwise would have paid. Approximately 50 separate state and federal lawsuits were filed making the substantially the same allegations, with the federal cases consolidated in multi-di

U.S. v. Boeing The Boeing Company We are currently representing The Boeing Company in a multi-million dollar lawsuit brought in the United States District Court, Central District of California by the United States. The complaint alleges that Boeing knowingly failed to disclose certain cost and pricing data when negotiating a contract for a defense component of the Air Force’s B-1B Bomber that the company was obligated to disclose under the Truth in Negotiations Act. The lawsuit asserts False Claims Act claims and seeks compensatory and treble damages and civil penalties. The lawsuit is ongoing.

Reddy v. MedQuist MedQuist Inc. We obtained summary judgment for MedQuist in a RICO lawsuit, seeking billions in damages, filed by a former employee in the Northern District of New Jersey. The lawsuit followed the company’s announcement of findings of an independent review of customer billings and its de-listing from the NASDAQ stock exchange in 2004. The complaint was initially filed against MedQuist, its majority shareholder, Phillips, and certain current and former directors, and alleged numerous counts, most of which were dismissed at the pleading stage. The court then granted summary judgment on the remaining claims in favor of the company. Subsequently, the plaintiff tried to file a new action in the Southern District of California. However, the California district

Brigitte Hoffman, et al. v. MedQuist MedQuist Inc.

Robin Anderson, et al., v. Abbott Laboratories Abbott Laboratories We represented Abbott Laboratories in a multi-million dollar, nationwide consumer putative class action lawsuit alleging that certain of Abbott's liquid infant formula products were packaged in metal cans lined with epoxy resins containing the chemical Bisphenol-A. The lawsuit alleged, among other things, that if plaintiffs and the putative class had known of the alleged existence of Bisphenol-A in the packaging of Abbott's liquid infant formula products sold in metal cans, they would not have purchased such products. Initially filed in the Central District of California, the lawsuit was transferred to the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri for coordination of pretrial proceedings with several additional lawsu

South Broward Hospital at et al. v. MedQuist MedQuist Inc. We represented MedQuist, a leading medical transcription provider, in a nationwide consumer fraud/RICO class action brought on behalf of more than 4,500 hospitals and health care organizations after the company announced the findings of an independent review of customer billings and was de-listed from the NASDAQ stock exchange in 2004. The case was referred to as "one of the largest ever taken by corporations and one of the first to use consumer fraud laws by companies against another company.” After getting the RICO and 17200 claim against the company thrown out on a motion to dismiss, and tying plaintiffs up in motion practice for several years, and before the parties had engaged in any formal discovery, Winston successfully resolved the

Steiner v. MedQuist MedQuist Inc. We represented MedQuist in a shareholder securities fraud class action filed in the District of New Jersey on behalf of all persons who purchased MedQuist common stock from March 29, 2000 through June 14, 2004. In mid-2004, MedQuist issued a press release in which it announced that it was conducting an internal investigation, and may have overcharged some of its transcription customers. The company’s stock was later delisted when, because of the ongoing investigation, the company did not file timely financial reports with the SEC. Based on these occurrences, the plaintiffs alleged that manipulations to MedQuist’s client billing systems overcharged customers for medical transcription services, and that improperly inflated revenue numbers wer

Selected Representations of Neal R. Marder

Kanter v. Barella, 489 F.3d 170 (3d Cir. 2007) MedQuist Inc. Winston & Strawn represented MedQuist, a medical transcription service provider, in a derivative lawsuit asserting a claim for breach of fiduciary duty against our client, its majority shareholder, Philips, and ten current and former MedQuist board members arising from allegations that MedQuist had systematically overbilled its customers for medical transcription services. This action, brought in the District of New Jersey, was one of six class actions filed following a July 2004 press release in which MedQuist announced the findings of an independent review of its billing methods. The New Jersey district court dismissed the derivative suit against MedQuist for failure of the plaintiff to make a demand on the MedQuist board and plaintiff’s

Katz, et al. v. Midas International Midas International Corporation Winston & Strawn obtained a significant victory for Midas International Corporation when a Montgomery County, Maryland Circuit Court judge denied a motion for class certification, finding that the plaintiffs had failed to meet the legal prerequisites to maintain a Maryland class action. This was the latest in a series of plaintiff’s attempts to obtain class action status. The original complaint was brought as a putative nationwide class action that was later withdrawn and amended to a statewide class.

Bela Lisa Friedman v. Quest International Fragrances Co. Quest International Fragrances Co. Our firm defended Quest International Fragrances Co. against a $60 million theft of trade secrets, unfair business practices, and breach of contract action brought in the Central District of California by a former consultant.

Game Prize Giveaway Class Actions McDonald's Corp. Our attorneys represented McDonald's in consumer class actions brought in federal and state courts across the country related to allegations of wrongdoing in connection with McDonald’s Monopoly and Who Wants To Be A Millionaire game prize giveaways.