Selected Experience

In Re: Domestic Drywall Antitrust Litigation

In 2013, Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Amended Complaint on behalf of a proposed class of direct purchasers of gypsum wallboard alleging price-fixing by Defendants.  Counsel for the Plaintiffs retained Dr. Russell Lamb to analyze whether the co-conspirators engaged in a conspiracy to fix, maintain, or stabilize prices of gypsum wallboard; whether prices of gypsum wallboard were artificially inflated due to the alleged cartel; whether there was widespread payment of overcharges across the proposed class; and whether aggregate damages to the proposed class as a whole could be reliably computed using standard economic methods and analyses.  Dr. Lamb filed two Expert Reports concerning class certification issues, two Expert Reports concerning liability and damages issues,* and one Supplemental Expert Report responding to a report submitted by a technical advisor retained by the Court.  Dr. Lamb also testified at deposition twice concerning class certification and at an extensive evidentiary hearing on the issue of class certification.

* In February 2016, the Court denied summary judgment to all but one of the Defendants remaining in the litigation.

On August 23, 2017, the Court certified the proposed class of direct purchasers, citing extensively to Dr. Lamb’s analysis of class-wide issues and testimony.  For instance, in its Opinion, the Court noted: “Dr. Lamb’s expert opinion fits the facts of the case, is relevant, and is therefore admissible to show classwide injury and measurable damages in support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification. […] The Court […] has thoroughly considered Dr. Lamb’s opinion in its decision on the DPPs’ Class Certification Motion.”  The Court also noted that Dr. Lamb “presented sufficient evidence from which a jury could conclude that all or nearly all Plaintiffs were impacted by Defendants’ alleged agreement to fix prices. This supports the conclusion that Plaintiffs have shown, by a preponderance of the evidence, that they can prove antitrust impact on a classwide basis.”  Further, the Court stated that Dr. Lamb’s “opinions and testimony are entitled to more weight than [Defendants’ economist] Dr. Hausman’s, in large part because his opinions adhere to the factual record.”  Similarly, in its April 2017 Order denying Defendants’ Daubert motion against Dr. Lamb, the Court found that Dr. Lamb’s “reports, and his testimony, establish that he has carefully acquainted himself with the issues of this case, as well as the factual record, and that his reports are ‘reliable’ and also ‘fit’ to the issues and facts in this case.”

The Court’s Memorandum re: Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification can be read here.


In Re: Titanium Dioxide Antitrust Litigation

In 2010, Plaintiffs filed a Complaint on behalf of a proposed class of direct purchasers of titanium dioxide citing allegations of price-fixing behavior.

Counsel for the Plaintiffs retained Dr. Russell Lamb to analyze whether it was possible to establish, using evidence common to the proposed class as a whole, that the Defendants agreed to restrict supply and/or fix or stabilize prices of titanium dioxide; whether proposed class members were impacted by the alleged cartel, and more specifically whether all, or nearly all, proposed class members paid an overcharge on their titanium dioxide purchases as a result of the alleged cartel; and whether a formulaic methodology was available to measure total damages suffered by the proposed class due to the alleged cartel.

Dr. Lamb filed two Declarations concerning class certification issues and two Declarations concerning liability and damages issues in which he successfully developed and demonstrated a formulaic methodology capable of measuring damages on a class-wide basis. Dr. Lamb also testified at deposition four times.

The Court certified the class in this matter on August 28, 2012. The Court’s finding relied heavily on Dr. Lamb’s analysis and testimony, stating that “Dr. Lamb’s regression analysis accurately reflects the characteristics of the titanium dioxide industry and the facts in this case.”

In December 2013, the Court approved a series of settlements reached between the class and the Defendants collectively worth over $163 million.


In Re: China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. Shareholder Litigation

In Re: China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. Shareholder Litigation, Cynthia Jones prepared an expert report on the issue of market efficiency, prepared a 10b-5 damages analysis, and testified at deposition.

In its decision to certify the class, the Court cited Ms. Jones’s analysis, noting that “the Court is satisfied that Jones’s methodology for categorizing News Days and Non– News Days was sufficiently reliable, objective, and consistent with scientific principles,” and further that “[t]he Court is persuaded that the test Jones used to evaluate the results of her regression and to conclude that CCME stocks traded on an efficient market was sufficiently reliable.” which ultimately resulted in the Court certifying the class.

The case settled for $12 million against the auditor Defendant and a default judgment was issued for the remaining damages against the company Defendants.


In Re: Polyurethane Foam Antitrust Litigation

In 2010, Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs filed a Complaint on behalf of a proposed class of indirect purchasers of flexible polyurethane foam citing allegations of price-fixing behavior.

Counsel for Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs retained Dr. Russell Lamb to analyze whether it was possible to establish, using economic analyses and evidence common to the proposed class as a whole, that the Defendants agreed to fix, raise, maintain and/or stabilize prices and allocate customers for flexible polyurethane foam; whether proposed class members were impacted by the alleged misconduct, and more specifically whether all, or nearly all, proposed class members paid an overcharge on their flexible polyurethane foam purchases as a result of the alleged misconduct; and whether a formulaic methodology was available to measure total damages suffered by the proposed class due to the alleged misconduct.

Dr. Lamb filed two Declarations concerning class certification issues and two Declarations concerning liability and damages issues. Dr. Lamb also testified at deposition four times in connection and testified at the class certification hearing.

The Court certified the indirect purchaser class in this matter on April 9, 2014, specifically citing Dr. Lamb’s analysis of class-wide issues. For instance, in certifying the class, the Court stated that “Indirect Purchasers offer Lamb’s expert testimony, which contains a detailed examination of discovery material produced in this matter, corroborating Indirect Purchasers’ understanding of Defendants’ business. Lamb presents commonly-accepted regression models to measure the amount of overcharge suffered by direct purchasers, and then measures the extent to which that overcharge found its way through the distribution chain to indirect purchasers.”

The Court endorsed Dr. Lamb’s analysis, which applied advanced econometric models to transactional and aggregate data, noting that “Indirect Purchasers present a workable damages methodology.”

In January 2016, the Court approved a final settlement of $151.25 million, the fourth largest settlement ever recovered by indirect purchasers in the United States.


In Re: Aftermarket Automotive Lighting Products Antitrust Litigation

In 2009, Plaintiffs filed a Complaint on behalf of a proposed class of purchasers of aftermarket automotive lighting products citing allegations of price-fixing behavior.

Counsel for the Plaintiffs retained Dr. Russell Lamb to analyze whether all proposed class members were injured as a result of the alleged misconduct. He was also asked to analyze if it is possible to measure class-wide damages suffered by the proposed class as a result of the alleged misconduct without resorting to individual inquiry and, if so, the amount of these damages.

Dr. Lamb filed four Expert Reports and one Expert Declaration concerning class certification and damages issues in which he concluded that all class members would have been injured as a result of the alleged misconduct and demonstrated that damages could be measured on a class-wide basis. He reaffirmed these conclusions while testifying twice at deposition and once at the class certification hearing concerning these issues.

In its decision to certify the class in this matter, the Court specifically cited Dr. Lamb’s analysis of class-wide issues, stating that his analysis provided “a sufficient basis from which to conclude that Plaintiffs would adduce common proof concerning the effect of Defendants’ alleged price-fixing conspiracy on prices class members paid.”

On May 14, 2014, the Court granted final approval to settlements reached between the class and the Defendants worth over $50 million.


Fond Du Lac Bumper Exchange Inc., et al. v. Jui Li Enterprise Company Ltd. et al.

In 2009, Plaintiffs filed a Complaint on behalf of a proposed class of purchasers of aftermarket automotive sheet metal parts citing allegations of price-fixing behavior.

Counsel for the Plaintiffs retained Dr. Russell Lamb to analyze whether all proposed class members were injured as a result of the alleged misconduct. He was also asked to analyze if it is possible to measure class-wide damages suffered by the proposed class as a result of the alleged misconduct without resorting to individual inquiry and, if so, the amount of these damages.

Dr. Lamb filed two Affidavits concerning data issues; three Expert Reports concerning class certification and damages issues, and one Expert Report concerning merits and damages issues. Dr. Lamb also testified at deposition twice in connection to this matter.

In 2016, the Court certified the class in this matter, relying in part on Dr. Lamb’s analysis of class-wide issues: “In sum, Lamb’s analysis and conclusions regarding common impact appear to be sound. He looked at evidence common to the class and performed a multiple regression analysis to determine that anti-competitive conduct would have affected prices generally. He did this by factoring out all variables which may affect price except the anti-competitive conduct and comparing the actual price paid with the price customers would otherwise have paid. From this, he was able to determine that anti-competitive conduct would have artificially raised prices.”


CEMEX Caracas Investments B.V. and CEMEX Caracas II Investments B.V., v. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela

Dr. Russell Lamb provided a valuation analysis in a matter involving arbitration proceedings between cement manufacturer CEMEX and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, following then-President Hugo Chavez’s decision to nationalize Venezuela’s cement industry.

Dr. Lamb was one of two economists retained by Counsel for the Respondent to calculate the value of the operating assets of CEMEX Venezuela and to determine the value of Claimant’s equity stake in CEMEX Venezuela. Dr. Lamb co-authored an Expert Report concerning this valuation.

In 2011, the parties reached a settlement in the amount of $600 million.


The Fanshawe College of Applied Arts and Technology, v. LG Philips LCD Co., Ltd., et al.

In 2007, Plaintiffs filed a Statement of Claim with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on behalf of a proposed class of purchasers of liquid crystal display (LCD) panels, as well as televisions, computer monitors, and laptops containing LCD panels citing allegations of price-fixing behavior.

Counsel for the Plaintiffs retained Dr. Russell Lamb to analyze whether proposed class members would have been injured as a result of the alleged misconduct. He was also asked to analyze whether it is possible to measure class-wide damages suffered by the proposed class as a result of the alleged misconduct based on common evidence without resorting to individual inquiry.

Dr. Lamb filed two Affidavits concerning class certification issues. Dr. Lamb also testified at cross-examination in connection with this matter.

In its 2011 ruling certifying the class in this matter, the Court specifically cited Dr. Lamb’s analysis of class-wide issues, stating that his analysis constituted “evidence of a viable methodology for the determination of loss on a class-wide basis.”

To date, Plaintiffs have reached settlements with a number of Defendants totaling approximately USD$48.43 million.


In Re: Puerto Rican Cabotage Litigation

In In Re: Puerto Rican Cabotage Litigation, a class of direct purchasers of cabotage (sea transportation) services between Puerto Rico and the continental U.S alleged that Defendants participated in a conspiracy to fix rates, surcharges, and other fees associated with those services.

Dr. Russell Lamb was retained by Counsel for Plaintiffs analyze class certification issues relating to the settlement class. Dr. Lamb filed two Affidavits in which he concluded that all class members would have been injured as a result of the alleged misconduct and that multiple regression analysis could be used to measure damages suffered by the class on a formulaic basis without resorting to individualized inquiry.

The Court ultimately granted certification of the settlement class, affirming that Dr. Lamb “set forth a reputable and workable model for determining damages as to individual class members in his affidavit.”


Clarke and Rebecca Wixon, et al. v. Wyndham Resort Development Corp., et al.

Dr. Russell Lamb was retained by Counsel for Plaintiffs in a matter concerning a program enacted by Defendant Wyndham, which allegedly reduced the value of Plaintiffs’ vacation credits.

Dr. Lamb submitted two Expert Reports regarding class certification issues and damages and testified twice at the deposition.

In its decision to certify the class, the Court upheld Dr. Lamb’s analysis, stating that “Dr. Lamb [had] presented a plausible class-wide method of proof.”


 

New York Shareholder Oppression Litigation

Cynthia Jones provided an expert analysis and opinion in a shareholder oppression case heard by the New York Superior Court. Ms. Jones prepared an expert valuation of a commercial real estate advisory firm and damages report in this matter. The case ultimately settled and damages were awarded in the amount equal to the estimate provided by Ms. Jones.


NASDAQ Facebook IPO Litigation

Securities expert Cynthia Jones a consulting expert and presented a damage analysis at mediation on behalf of investors in the NASDAQ Facebook IPO litigation.

The parties ultimately reached a settlement in excess of $30 million.


In Re: Lafarge North America, Inc. Securities Litigation

Cynthia Jones was retained by Counsel for Pension Board of Philadelphia to provide a valuation report regarding the tender offer price for LNA by Lafarge, SA.

In her analysis, Ms. Jones applied guideline public company and transaction methods to determine the fair market value of the shares. Ms. Jones uncovered several deficiencies in the fairness opinion analysis and ultimately drove a settlement reflecting a 10 percent increase in the tender offer price.

In support of the revised tender offer price and settlement amount, Ms. Jones conducted confirmatory due diligence and submitted an expert Declaration.


In Re: Schwab Corp. Securities Litigation

Cynthia Jones provided consulting services and supported expert testimony In Re: Schwab Corp. Securities Litigation, pursuant to Federal and California State claims.

Ms. Jones prepared a forensic analysis of benchmark performance deviation and a damage analysis.

Her analysis was instrumental in obtaining a $200 million settlement on behalf of fund investors.


Consumer Products Fraud Litigation

Cynthia Jones provided consulting services in a consumer fraud action against a major U.S. food manufacturer regarding a misleading marketing campaign that highlighted purported digestive health benefits of a particular brand of yogurt.

Ms. Jones analyzed weekly consumer sales price and volume data provided by Nielsen and calculated damages based on the price premium paid by consumers for non-proven benefits.

The case ultimately settled for $8.5 million.


In Re: BankAtlantic Bancorp Inc. Securities Litigation

Cynthia Jones provided consulting services and supported the testifying expert In Re: BankAtlantic Bancorp Inc. Securities Litigation, one of a few fraud class actions to reach trial since 1995.

Ms. Jones performed the underlying analytics and prepared expert reports for class certification and materiality, loss causation, and damages.

The jury in this case found in favor of Plaintiffs and awarded damages, relying heavily on the damages methodology (a verdict later overturned by the Court.) Ms. Jones attended the courtroom trial, supported the testifying expert, and prepared Counsel for cross-examination of the Defendants’ experts.


Insider Trading Enforcement Litigation

Cynthia Jones was retained by the SEC in an insider trading enforcement action to develop an equitable Plan of Distribution of a $35.8 million Fair Fund to harmed public investors, including a carve-out group of institutional investors that could trace purchases directly to the Defendant.

Ms. Jones analyzed Defendant trades over multi-day window, quantified ill-gotten gains, and devised a plan to compensate investors on a pro-rata basis, accounting for certain carve-out transactions.


RMBS Trusts Litigation

Cynthia Jones was retained by the SEC to structure equitable Plans of Distribution for several hundred million dollars in Fair Funds (disgorgement, penalty and interest) on behalf of investors in RMBS Trusts issued by Credit Suisse and JP Morgan to eligible investors in more than 3,000 separate securities, each with a unique CUSIP (Committee on Uniform Securities Identification Procedures), historical pricing data and distributions.


In Re: Sprint Nextel Corp. Securities Litigation

Cynthia Jones was retained In Re: Sprint Nextel Corp. Securities Litigation to rebut Defendants’ expert on market efficiency for a class of ten corporate debt securities.

Defendants’ expert opined that the market for these securities was not efficient. Ms. Jones assisted in preparing an analysis of the trade-by-trade data for the bonds provided by FINRA/TRACE, including an event study, and facilitated in taking the expert’s deposition. Ms. Jones also assisted in preparing an expert rebuttal report that successfully refuted Defendants’ expert and was cited as supportive of the Court’s decision to certify the class of bondholders.

Shareholders and bondholders ultimately received a settlement in excess of $130 million.


In Re: Oppenheimer Funds Municipal Securities Litigation

Cynthia Jones was retained In Re: Oppenheimer Funds Municipal Securities Litigation to calculate damages for investors in 19 municipal bond mutual funds.

Ms. Jones provided an expert mediation report and consulting services in this matter which ultimately resulted in a $90 million settlement.