Gary I. Smith Jr.
Gary is a partner in the firm’s Philadelphia office, where he focuses his practice on antitrust litigation. In his young career, Gary has already secured over $882.5 million to benefit the victims of anticompetitive practices.
Gary has represented a diverse range of clientele, including hospital systems, investment and pension funds, universities, local governments, dental laboratories, pediatricians, farmers, and construction contractors.
Gary has litigated cases at every level, from state trial court all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States, during which he has gained a wide range of experience briefing and arguing dispositive motions, taking and defending fact and expert witness depositions, and serving on trial teams, inclusive of first- and second-chair jury trial experience. He has gained experience and institutional knowledge challenging monopolistic practices and cartel activity in a wide range of industries—from the agricultural sector to the transportation and aviation sectors to the financial markets—with a particular emphasis on healthcare, where Gary has litigated cases concerning biologics (vaccines), pharmaceuticals, and medical product distribution markets.
Gary also regularly writes on antitrust topics, most notably contributing to the American Bar Association’s Section of Antitrust’s seminal publication, Antitrust Law Developments. Gary has earned local accolades as a Rising Star in Antitrust Litigation by Pennsylvania Super Lawyers (2017-2019) and national accolades as one of five Rising Star under 40 in Health Care Law by Law360 (2017).
He has played a leading role in cases that have gained nationwide attention, including:
- In re Dental Supplies Antitrust Litigation, No. 16-696-BMC (E.D.N.Y.), in which a proposed class of private dental practices claim that the four major distributors of dental products and equipment conspired to fix margins, divide markets and allocate customers, and orchestrate industry boycotts of lower-priced, innovative rivals. The Federal Trade Commission filed a related lawsuit against the dental distributor companies a year after the private plaintiffs first initiated their action, borrowing legal theories first investigated and advanced by the private plaintiffs. The private plaintiffs’ action was settled just minutes before a class certification Daubert hearing was set to commence for $80 million, while the Federal Trade Commission’s action remains ongoing.
- In re LIBOR-Based Financial Instruments Antitrust Litigation, No. 11-md-2262-NRB (S.D.N.Y.), in which a certified class of purchasers of over-the-counter (OTC) financial instruments with interest payments tied to the London Interbank Offering Rate (LIBOR) are challenging the collusive manipulation of U.S. Dollar LIBOR by the world’s largest financial institutions. The collusion is claimed to have suppressed the U.S. Dollar LIBOR rate, which allowed the defendant banks to benefit financially to the detriment of their counterparties in OTC instruments. The case has resulted in $590 million in settlements with four banks (Barclays, Citibank, HSBC, and Deutsche Bank), and continues against the remaining thirteen defendant banks.
- Adriana M. Castro, M.D., P.A. v. Sanofi Pasteur Inc., No. 2:11-cv-07178-JMV (D.N.J.), in which a certified class of wholesalers, hospitals, and physicians that purchased Sanofi’s quadrivalent conjugate meningococcal vaccine (MCV4) Menactra (a vaccine for Meningitis) claimed that Sanofi monopolized the MCV4 market by threatening large price penalties across Sanofi’s broad line of pediatric vaccines if pediatricians purchased MCV4 vaccines from Sanofi’s only MCV4 rival, Novartis. Sanofi’s conditional pricing practices had the purpose and effect of foreclosing Sanofi’s only MCV4 rival from the market, allowing Sanofi to continue to charge monopoly prices for Menactra. The case settled in December 2016 for $61.5 million.
- In re Transpacific Passenger Air Transportation Antitrust Litigation, No. 08-md-01913-CRB (N.D. Cal.), in which a certified class of consumers of transpacific passenger air travel allege that thirteen airlines conspired to fix the prices of certain transpacific passenger air fares and fuel surcharges. The last of the thirteen defendants settled in early 2019 for $58 million, bringing the total settlements in the case to over $147 million.
Gary is also committed to serving the community through pro bono work. Most recently, Gary has been working with a team of Hausfeld lawyers to advise victims of clergy sexual abuse who have received settlement offers from the Philadelphia Archdiocese.
Gary graduated from the University of Arizona in May of 2008, where he received a B.S.B.A. in Business Economics, and from the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law in May of 2011, where he received his J.D.
While in law school, Gary worked as a research assistant for Visiting Associate Professor of Law Amandeep S. Grewal, received honors as a Willard H. Pedrick Scholar, and spent a semester externing with the Securities and Exchange Commission in Washington, D.C.
Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University, J.D. 2011
University of Arizona, B.S.B.A. in Business Economics, 2008
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
United States District Court for the District of Arizona
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Affiliations & Memberships
Super Lawyers, Pennsylvania Antitrust Litigation Rising Star (2017-2019)
Law360, Rising Star Under 40 in Health Care Law (2017)
American Bar Association,
- Section of Antitrust Law
- Young Lawyers Division
Contributor, ABA Antitrust Section, Antitrust Law Developments 8th Edition
Pennsylvania Bar Association
Willard H. Pedrick Scholar
News & Press
Susman Godfrey L.L.P. and Hausfeld LLP Announce Lawsuits and Settlements Totaling $340 Million That Impact Individuals and Institutions Who Owned a U.S. Dollar LIBOR-Based Instrument Between August 2007 and May 2010
Author, Second Circuit Rejects Third Circuit’s Views on Class Member Ascertainability, Lexology (Aug. 9, 2017)
Author, No Safe Harbor: The Third Circuit Once Again Declines to Apply the Price Cost Test to a Loyalty Discount Case, Lexology (Aug. 13, 2016)
Author, Third Circuit Reaffirms the Continued Viability of the Intertwined Standard for Antitrust Standing, Lexology (Mar. 1, 2016).
Co-Author (with Brent W. Landau), "Bundling Claims Under Section 1 of the Sherman Act: Focusing on Firms' Abilities to Create Anticompetitive Effects in a Market, Rather Than Their Share of It," Antitrust Health Care Chronicle, Vol. 28/ No. 1, ABA Section of Antitrust Law (Jan. 2015).
Presentations & Speeches
Panelist, ABA Section of Antitrust Law Agriculture and Food Antitrust Case Update 2019, February 28, 2019