Skip to content

Noah Brumfield

Partner

Washington, D.C.

Image of Noah Brumfield
Noah Brumfield

Partner

Washington, D.C.

Noah is a partner in the Antitrust practice and splits his time between Washington, D.C. and Silicon Valley. He partners with clients to craft and execute global antitrust strategies while also representing them before US courts, the US Department of Justice, Federal Trade Commission, and the various states’ Attorney General offices. 

Antitrust plaintiffs and enforcers are invoking the antitrust laws in increasingly novel ways in private litigation and government investigations. Noah provides creative and nimble strategies that are specific to his client’s business objectives, whether they are in high-stakes litigation or planning a transformative deal. He is singularly focused on understanding each client to provide practical, business-oriented solutions.

Noah draws on his 20 years of experience with complex cross-border antitrust issues, with a focus on how the antitrust laws intersect with intellectual property. He has successfully defended and asserted antitrust claims in merger and non-merger investigations before the enforcement agencies, and in federal district court.

Noah enjoys teaching on Antitrust and Innovation as an adjunct professor for antitrust at UC Berkeley School of Law. He is a prolific author and speaker on a range of competition topics, and contributes to American Bar Association (ABA) publications and commentary. 

Experience highlights

Related articles

blister pack of pills

Publications: 09 June 2022

Webinar: "Reverse Payments" from Actavis to California AB 824: The Current State of Litigation Settlements in the Hatch-Waxman/BCPIA Space

Since the Supreme Court’s seminal decision in Actavis, brand and generic drug companies have been working within the antitrust framework laid out in that decision to craft patent litigation…

Read more

Publications: 28 March 2022

What DOJ's shifting stance on IP means for SEPs mergers

Read more

Publications: 01 March 2022

U.S. criminal antitrust enforcement priorities take shape through inter-agency and global coordination

Read more

Publications: 18 February 2022

The EU Chips Act: strengthening the EU’s technological leadership and confronting semiconductor shortages

Read more

Office

Washington, D.C.

Allen & Overy LLP
1101 New York Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C.
20005

View office →

Silicon Valley

Allen & Overy LLP
550 High Street
Palo Alto
CA 94301

View office →

San Francisco

Allen & Overy LLP
595 Market Street
San Francisco
CA 94105

View office →

Qualifications

Professional

Admitted: State Bar of California, 1999

Admitted: District of Columbia Bar, 2004

US District Court for the District of Columbia

US District Court for the Central District of California

US District Court for the Eastern District of California

US District Court for the Northern District of California

US District Court for the Southern District of California

US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Academic

JD, Columbia University School of Law, 1999

BA, University of California, Los Angeles, 1995

Other noteworthy experience 

Advising: 

  • CrowdStrike, defended CrowdStrike against antitrust claim arising from cybersecurity industry standard-setting in the Northern District of California, and defended parallel investigation by the DOJ Antitrust Division.
  • Par Pharmaceuticals, negotiated and subsequently defended AndroGel patent settlement in the leading “reverse payment” case.
  • Ellie Mae, defeated injunction claim by competitor in monopolization complaint alleging platform self-preferencing discrimination and refusal to deal in the Northern District of California.
  • Foxconn, defeated antitrust conspiracy allegations involving USB standards-setting participation, in the Central District of California.
  • Warner Chilcott defeated, on summary judgment, a novel "product hopping" claim raised in a monopolization suit by a competitor in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania involving Doryx pharmaceutical.
  • Scientific Games, defeated Handgards-based monopolization novel Handgards-based monopolization claim involving allegations of unlawful patent licensing in the Northern District of Georgia.
  • VivaAeromexico, defended leading Mexican carrier in consumer class action in District of Maryland for alleged antitrust conspiracy among competing airlines involving payment of tax rebates.
  • Leading semiconductor manufacturer, cleared of antitrust allegations in multi-jurisdictional investigation involving U.S. federal and state enforcers, and also in the European Commission and China.
  • Anthem, represented in its bid to acquire Cigna, against the US DOJ's high-profile antitrust challenge to the merger, in a bench trial in the District Court for the District of Columbia.
  • Lucasfilm, defended against DOJ investigation into “no-poach agreements” with others in the high-tech industry.

Recognition

Awards & accolades

Shortlisted article for the Antitrust Writing Awards

Concurrences Review and George Washington University Law School Competition Law Center, 2021