Ms. Taylor is an associate in the firm's antitrust/competition practice group, where her practice includes assisting clients with government reviews of mergers and acquisitions, Department of Justice Antitrust Division leniency applications and investigations, civil litigation, and advising clients on antitrust and consumer protection issues.
Ms. Taylor is also active in Arnold & Porter's pro bono criminal defense program through which she has represented clients in multiple cases involving drug and contempt charges in D.C. Superior Court.
Antitrust/Competition Representative Matters
- Counsel to GrafTech International, a leading manufacturer of graphite electrodes, in connection with its $700 million acquisition of C/G Electrodes and Seadrift Coke (which manufactures a key raw material used to produce graphite electrodes). The acquisition of C/G closed after a second request without any remedy, and GrafTech was permitted to close its acquisition of Seadrift after agreeing to a consent decree that addressed DOJ’s concerns about GrafTech gaining access to its competitors’ confidential information.
- Defends client in connection with DOJ and SEC grand jury investigations, state attorneys general investigation, and related multi-district civil litigation involving an alleged industry-wide, multi-year conspiracy to rig bids in violation of the Sherman Act, securities laws, California False Claims Act, and other state laws.
- Tarmac America in litigation alleging price fixing for cement and concrete in Florida. Cases voluntarily dismissed after cement claims were dismissed and class certification was denied for concrete claims.
- Represented client in connection with the filing of a DOJ Antitrust Division leniency application and subsequent cooperation with DOJ and state government investigations.
- Celgene in its $2.9 billion acquisition of Pharmion. Although Celgene and Pharmion were two of three firms with FDA approval for drugs targeting a certain blood cancer, the FTC cleared the transaction without a second request after being convinced that the parties' drugs were not in fact close competitors.
- GlaxoSmithKline in In re Wellbutrin Antitrust Litigation,defending current monopolization class actions asserting that patent infringement actions were shams designed to keep generic competitors off the market.