Skip to main content

Laura Shores is an antitrust trial lawyer with more than 30 years of experience representing clients in civil and criminal antitrust matters.

Laura has litigated and tried a number of significant antitrust actions in cases brought by federal agencies and civil plaintiffs. While Laura has represented clients in a variety of industries, she has particularly deep experience in defending clients in antitrust class actions in the life sciences sector. In a landmark case brought by the Federal Trade Commission against Schering-Plough Corporation challenging its settlement of patent litigation with manufacturers of generic drugs, Laura prevailed after a two-month administrative hearing before the FTC in the first case challenging a settlement of patent litigation between brand and generic pharmaceutical cases.

Ms. Shores has also defended clients in other complex civil litigation matters in federal and state courts, as well as in arbitration proceedings.

Ms. Shores' practice also focuses on white-collar defense and internal investigations. She has represented corporations and individuals in government investigations and prosecutions across a broad range of substantive areas, including antitrust, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, money laundering, securities fraud, and procurement fraud. She has also represented individuals in Independent Counsel and Congressional investigations.


  • Sandoz/Fougera Pharmaceuticals Inc. in multidistrict litigation involving several dozen direct and indirect purchaser class action complaints, as well as State Attorney General actions, alleging that generic manufacturers conspired to raise the prices of a large number of different pharmaceutical products. In re Generic Pharmaceuticals Pricing Antitrust Litigation, MDL 2724 (E.D. Pa.). 
  • Bayer CropScience in class actions alleging a conspiracy among manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers of agricultural inputs to boycott online retailers. In re Crop Inputs Antitrust Litigation.
  • Elanco Animal Health in litigation alleging claims of monopolization, tying, and exclusive dealing with respect to the company's flea and tick products. Tevra Brands LLC v. Bayer Healthcare LLC et al.
  • Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, in federal and state class action and non-class action litigation alleging antitrust and marketing related claims regarding one of its leading products. Obtained complete defense verdict in trial in bankruptcy proceeding, defeating certain antitrust and civil RICO claims.
  • Major pharmaceutical company in multidistrict litigation brought by putative classes of purchasers and states attorneys general alleging price-fixing of generic drugs. Sergeants Benevolent Association Health & Welfare Fund, et al. v. Fougera Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al.
  • Major pharmaceutical company in putative antitrust class actions alleging that defendants procured patent by fraud and engaged in sham patent litigation. Motion to dismiss granted and affirmed on appeal.United Food and Commercial Workers Unions and Employers Midwest Health Benefits Fund, et al. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., et al.
  • Major pharmaceutical company in putative antitrust class action alleging that defendants entered into reverse payment settlement of patent litigation. Miami-Luken, Inc. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Co., et al.
  • Major pharmaceutical company in case brought by state attorney general alleging that defendants violated state law by engaging in sham patent litigation with prospective generic competitors. State of Louisiana v. Pfizer Inc. and Warner Lambert LLC.
  • Two Japanese executives of a maritime shipping company in an antitrust criminal investigation of the international car shipping industry. Car Carriers Criminal Cartel Investigation.
  • Senior executive and primary individual target in antitrust criminal investigation of auto parts manufacturer. Matter concluded with no charges filed against client. Auto Parts Criminal Cartel Investigation.
  • Major pharmaceutical company in antitrust class actions challenging a patent litigation settlement agreement between branded and generic pharmaceutical companies. In re Lamictal Antitrust Litigation.
  • GSK in a case brought by Santa Clara County on behalf of all California citizens alleging violations of California's false advertising law. County of Santa Clara v. GlaxoSmithKline.
  • Prominent attorney charged with money laundering and wire fraud; voluntarily dismissed after a five-year investigation. United States v. Kuehne.
  • Microprocessor manufacturer in monopolization cases brought under Section 2 of the Sherman Act and in parallel proceedings before antitrust authorities in the European Union, Japan, South Korea, and the Federal Trade Commission. Advanced Microsystems Inc. v. Intel Corporation; In re Intel Corp. Microprocessor Litigation.
  • Major pharmaceutical company in a landmark case brought by the Federal Trade Commission challenging the settlement of patent cases brought against manufacturers of generic drugs. After a two-month hearing, the administrative law judge ruled in the client's favor, and the FTC was unsuccessful on appeal. Schering-Plough v. Federal Trade Commission.
  • Pharmaceutical company, its CEO, and its board of directors, in successfully obtaining dismissal with prejudice of federal securities class actions filed against alleging violations of SEC Regulation FD and various federal securities laws. In re Schering-Plough Corporation Securities Litigation.
  • Schering-Plough, its CEO, and its board of directors in the dismissal of a state class action alleging common law claims for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of fiduciary duty. Lurie v. Schering-Plough Corp.
  • Manufacturer of orthodontic appliances in a case alleging monopolization under Section 2 of the Sherman Act. The case resulted in a directed verdict on behalf of the client at the close of the plaintiff's case. Viazis, et al. v. GAC International, Inc.
  • Senior Clinton administration official in connection with three indictments brought by independent counsel Kenneth Starr, as well as in related investigations before Congress. The district court dismissed the independent counsel's second indictment, holding that it violated the client's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. This holding was challenged on appeal and in the U.S. Supreme Court, which, in a case of first impression, upheld the dismissal. United States v. Hubbell.
  • Civil rights organizations, including the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, serving as lead trial counsel, in a federal voting rights case against Florida state officials in the days before the 2004 presidential election. Jacksonville Coalition for Voter Protection, et al. v. Hood.
  • Newly registered minority voters seeking to enforce a consent decree in a 23-year-old voting rights case in the District of New Jersey. After a preliminary injunction hearing, the court enforced the decree. The case was litigated all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in the days before, and including, Election Day in November 2004. Democratic National Committee v. Republican National Committee.


Benchmark Litigation
Litigation Star – Competition/Antitrust (2024)
National Practice Area – Competition/Antitrust (2024)
Top 250 Women in Litigation (2015, 2018)
Top 100 Trial Lawyers (2015, 2018)
Local Litigation Star – Antitrust (2018)
LMG Life Sciences Guide
"Life Sciences Star" Antitrust (2018-2023)
"Life Sciences Star" Non-IP Litigation (2014-2016)
The Legal 500 US
Antitrust: Civil Litigation/Class Actions (2019, 2021-2022)



  • J.D., University of Chicago Law School, 1988
  • B.A., Smith College, 1985, cum laude


  • District of Columbia


  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, Robert S. Vance


  • Member, Section of Antitrust Law, American Bar Association