The Legal 500

Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon

Paul Hastings LLP

55 SECOND STREET, 24TH FLOOR, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105, USA
Tel:
Work +1 415 856 7000
Fax:
Fax +1 415 856 7100
Web:
www.paulhastings.com
Atlanta, Beijing, Brussels, Chicago, Costa Mesa, Frankfurt and 15 more

Holly House

Tel:
Work 415-856-7000
Email:
Paul Hastings LLP

Work Department

Litigation; Antitrust and Competition

Position

Holly House is an Antitrust and Competition partner in the Litigation Department of Paul Hastings. Her practice focuses on antitrust and trade regulation matters as well as intellectual property disputes. Ms. House has successfully represented premier clients as both plaintiffs and defendants in myriad types of complex commercial and class action disputes, including at several notable trials. Ms. House is the past chair of the California State Bar’s Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section. She has been named one of the "Top 250 Women in Litigation" and a "Local Litigation Star" in the inaugural 2013 edition of Benchmark Litigation, "Top 75 California Women Litigators” by the Daily Journal in 2010 and 2011, one of the Best Lawyers in America since 2005, one of the top 50 women lawyers in Northern California in 2011 and 2012, and a Northern California “Super Lawyer” since this peer award was first offered. Ms. House has also repeatedly been named one of the top antitrust lawyers in the United States by Chambers USA, where sources single her out as “a reliable and responsive, business-savvy practitioner” and "a long-standing, diligent antitrust attorney -- she commands great respect."

Career

- Leading defense team for LG Display in TFT-LCD Flat Panel Screens MDL in the Northern District of California. - Led the damages effort and on trial team for Oracle Corporation that yielded a $1.3 billion verdict against SAP AG, SAP America and TomorrowNow for improper infringement and misuse of Oracle’s proprietary service and support software; this was the largest jury verdict of 2010 and the largest copyright verdict ever. - Represented IKON Office Solutions in antitrust actions brought by independent servicer competitors who are complaining about IKON’s leasing practices and pursuing single-brand aftermarket domination claims. - Assisted in defense of Intel Corporation in civil purported antitrust class actions related to Intel’s and other Silicon Valley companies’ hiring practices Was on team representing Anadarko Petroleum in connection with Louisiana oil spill litigation against BP - Represented SanDisk Corp. in antitrust litigation in EDVA “rocket docket” seeking determination that MPEG patent pool was anti-competitive - Defended luxury goods conglomerate LVMH Moet Hennessy – Louis Vuitton and international trading giant Mitsui Co. Ltd. (and its subsidiaries) in complex multidistrict price-fixing litigations involving prestige cosmetics and the food additive methionine Key member of team that represented Oracle Corporation in California state action brought by PeopleSoft in connection with PeopleSoft’s efforts to avoid acquisition by Oracle - Member of team which represented California Department of Water Resources (DWR) in dispute with energy supplier Sempra stemming from the California energy crisis; arbitration panel awarded $75 million to DWR in the first phase of the dispute Lead counsel for high-tech storage company Adaptec Inc. in dispute with company it had acquired yielding client $53+ million arbitration result Part of teams which represented electronic payment company First Data Corporation in actions brought by DOJ to block acquisition of Concord and investigating practices of subsidiary Western Union - Secured $50 million settlement for national real estate developer suing Indian tribe over casino development - Represented Covad Communications in its successful battles to compete in the dynamic broadband market, including $30 million arbitration result against SBC Communications - Defended National Football League in a heated dispute with Oakland Raiders involving intellectual property, contract, derivative and other claims summary; adjudication for NFL granted - Defended Eastman Kodak in all stages of ITS v. Kodak, a groundbreaking antitrust suit brought by independent service organizations regarding access to service parts that included several appeals (including to the U.S. Supreme Court) and a jury trial Represented Frito-Lay Inc. against suit brought by California Attorney General under Proposition 65

Member

Adviser, State Bar of California’s Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section (2005–present) Chair of Executive Committee, State Bar of California’s Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section (2004–2005) First vice chair, vice chair (Golden State Institute), secretary-treasurer and editor of Competition, Executive Committee, State Bar of California’s Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section (past) ABA Antitrust Section

Education

Ms. House received her J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1988 and her B.A. from Smith College, magna cum laude, in 1984.


United States: Antitrust

Civil litigation/class actions

Within: Civil litigation/class actions

At Paul Hastings LLP, ‘matters are handled strategically and effectively with the understanding that the lawyers know how to try cases and will do so if needed’. Following a successful trial defense of Dow, as co-lead counsel, in an MDL alleging price-fixing between polyether urethane producers, Jeremy Evans is now handling the appeal. On the merger clearance side, Holly House secured court approval for the settlement of a class action arising from the DOJ’s challenge to the Twin America merger. Korean Airlines and eBay are also clients. Former practice chair Michael Cohen left for Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP, while IP and antitrust expert Blair Jacobs joined from McDermott Will & Emery LLP. The team is mostly split across the San Francisco and Washington DC offices.

[back to top]


Back to index

Legal Developments worldwide

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • Innovation & Thailand 4.0: Value Creation for Business using Trade Secrets

    Thailand 4.0 stands for the new stage to transform the country currently relying on heavy industries (3.0 stage) into a creativity and innovation-driven economy. Trade secrets are definitively value-based and could help pursing Thailand 4.0.
  • Novelties Introduced by the Movable Pledge Law

    As of January 1, 2017, Law No. 6750 on Pledge over Movable Assets in Commercial Transactions (“Movable Pledge Law “), which was enacted on October 20, 2016, entered into force and abolished Law No.1447 on Commercial Enterprise Pledge (“Commercial Enterprise Pledge Law “). The Movable Pledge Law introduces significant changes and offers more practical methods for establishing pledge over movable assets as explained below.
  • Determination of Injury in Anti-Dumping Investigations: Turkey’s Side of the Story

    I - Introduction
  • Tax evasion: Only voluntary disclosure affords protection from severe penalties

    Anyone who has been caught for tax evasion should expect to be faced with severe penalties. Voluntary disclosure is the only way of returning to a state of normal tax affairs and avoiding penalties.
  • Turkish Health PPP Projects

    The Turkish health sector has undergone major reforms over the past ten years as part of the health transformation program. The most important pillar of such program has been the development of public-private partnership (“PPP ”) model health campus projects. More than twenty health campus projects with an investment amount of more than € 10 billion have been developed through PPP model in Turkey. They are currently at different stages ranging from tendering to operation, and more than ten health PPP projects are still in the pipeline.
  • Infrastructure REIC: An Alternative Source of Funding for Infrastructure Projects

    With the start of operation in certain BOT and other PPP model infrastructure projects in Turkey, refinancing alternatives have become more attractive and diversified. Capital market instruments and institutions are likely to have a greater share in the refinancings of projects which have become operational and the construction risks have been removed. Over the last few years, the use of capital market instruments in the infrastructure financings have gained a new impetus with the introduction of various incentives and financing solutions in this aspect. Most recently, the removal of the 1/3 and 1/5 bond issuance limits for healthcare PPP projects on 18 February 2017 represented an important step towards incentivizing the use of bonds in the healthcare sector. In line with this overall strategy, the government has also adopted various measures to make the Real Estate Investment Companies (“REICs ”) more attractive for the financing/refinancing of infrastructure projects such as BOT, BLT and other PPP projects.
  • Ankara-Niğde Highway Project

    Tender process for 330 km Ankara-Niğde Highway Project has been launched by the General Directorate of Highways upon publication of the tender announcement in the Official Gazette on December 30, 2016.
  • Establishment of the Natural Gas Spot Market in Turkey

    In line with the government’s objectives to make Turkey a regional hub for natural gas trading, a natural gas spot market has been established by the Natural Gas Organized Wholesale Market Regulation published in the Official Gazette on 31 March 2017.
  • Philippine Court of Appeals Denies Issuance of Environmental Protection Order Against Mining Company

    In a decision issued on March 8, 2017, the Philippine Court of Appeals (CA) denied the petition by NGO Ang Aroroy ay Alagaan, Inc. and certain individuals, for the issuance of a writ of kalikasan against Filminera Resources Corporation, and its directors and officers. The petitioners have claimed that Filminera, which operates in the Philippine province of Masbate, had been causing environmental damage in the conduct of its mining operations in violation of local law, and that a writ of kalikasan should be issued.
  • LIS ALIBI PENDENS UNDER THE COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) NO 44/2001 ON JURISDICTIONAND THE RECOGNITION AN

    Lis Alibi pendens is Latin for ‘suit pending elsewhere .’ Both Articles 27 and 28 of the EU Regulation 44/2001 regulate the existence of lis alibi pendens and related judicial actions. In particular it is a doctrine that regulates the jurisdictional relationship of courts hearing concurrent proceedings involving the same or related causes of action between the same parties pending in the courts of different Member States.