Skip to content
Dylan Ballard
Dylan Ballard
Partner — Antitrust
Partner — Antitrust

Dylan Ballard

Dylan Ballard
San Francisco

555 Mission Street
Suite 2000
San Francisco, California 94105

Dylan Ballard
  • Defended management software provider against state and federal antitrust claims relating to data management system access; In re Dealer Management Systems Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 2817 (N.D. Ill.)

  • Defended leading manufacturer in price-fixing actions concerning lithium-ion rechargeable batteries; In re Lithium-ion Batteries Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 2420 (N.D. Cal.)

  • National counsel defending industry-leading multinational electronics companies in price-fixing class actions, individual plaintiff actions, and state attorney general actions regarding cathode ray tube products; In re Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1917 (N.D. Cal.)

  • Defended global electronics companies in consolidated class actions and individual actions alleging price-fixing of flash memory products; In re Flash Memory Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1852 (N.D. Cal.)

  • Represented international electronics companies in private and governmental price-fixing actions concerning thin film transistor liquid crystal display products; In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1827 (N.D. Cal.)

  • Defended global technology manufacturer in civil price-fixing class actions and related U.S. and foreign enforcement agency proceedings regarding static random access memory chip products; In re Static Random Access Memory (SRAM) Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1819 (N.D. Cal.)

  • National counsel defending civil price-fixing and government enforcement actions regarding dynamic random access memory chip products; In re Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAM) Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1486 (N.D. Cal.)

  • Representing international payment-processing company in coordinated class actions and related settlement appeals concerning alleged payment card tying and network exclusionary practices; In re Credit/Debit Card Tying Cases, Cal. Jud. Council Coord. Proc. No. 4335

  • Prevailed on behalf of one of world’s largest technology companies in multi-billion dollar ICC arbitration against client’s largest global competitor (2021)

  • Representing global micro-irrigation company as plaintiff in action alleging group boycott conspiracies among manufacturers of micro-irrigation products in violation of California’s Cartwright Act and Unfair Competition Law; Jain Irrigation, Inc., et al. v. Netafim Irrigation, Inc., et al.(San Diego Superior Court)

  • Representing telescope manufacturer against price-fixing, market allocation, monopolization and attempted monopolization claims; Optronic Technologies, Inc. v. Ningbo Sunny Electronic Co., Ltd.(N.D. Cal.)

  • Defending leading international provider of cybersecurity products against antitrust boycott and refusal to deal claims regarding testing standards development; NSS Labs v. Crowdstrike, Inc.(N.D. Cal.)

  • Represented the largest independent publisher of yellow pages phone directories in California as plaintiff in below cost pricing, loss leader and secret rebate action under California’s Unfair Practices Act, favorably settling for a confidential amount; AGI Publishing, Inc. v. YP Western Directory (Fresno Superior Court)

  • Antitrust counsel for global electronics company defending IP-related antitrust claims in multi-billion dollar litigation with Rambus, coordinating with patent counsel in worldwide related proceedings; Rambus Inc. v. Micron Technology, Inc., et al. (San Francisco Superior Court)

  • Obtained complete dismissal at pleadings stage on behalf of vehicle fueling network in action alleging antitrust conspiracy among providers of fueling networks; Net LLC v. CFN Holding Co. (San Diego Superior Court)

  • Obtained complete dismissal with prejudice on behalf of nonprofit standardized test provider of actual monopolization claim under Section 2 of the Sherman Act alleging product disparagement and misuse of trademarks and copyrights; ACT, Inc. v. Worldwide Interactive Network, Inc. (E.D. Tenn.)

  • Representing international electronics company in global patent and standards related antitrust governmental proceedings, and private antitrust actions involving major technology companies including Qualcomm and Apple

  • Secured complete dismissal of all claims against electronics company in boycott and monopsonization case relating to smartphone patent licensing, based on lack of antitrust standing and failure to allege a plausible conspiracy; obtained affirmance of defense judgment on appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals; Cascades v. RPX Corp. (N.D. Cal.)

  • Obtained complete dismissal of sham litigation, predatory pricing and state unfair competition counterclaims in patent infringement action concerning electric grid voltage optimization technology; RGA Varentec, Inc. v. GridCo, Inc. (D. Del.)

  • Defended information technology services company and top executives with respect to criminal Sherman Act bid-rigging charges and related false claims and unfair competition civil action by California Attorney General

  • Defended senior executives in DOJ antitrust grand jury investigations of auto parts industry

  • Defending the chief executive of a major consumer facing branded manufacturer in a United States Department of Justice criminal price fixing investigation

  • Represented key targets and defendants in DOJ antitrust prosecutions regarding DRAM memory chips, cathode ray tubes, and others

  • Represented executive in DOJ antitrust grand jury investigation and criminal prosecution regarding alleged antitrust violations in real estate foreclosure market

  • Obtained complete dismissal on behalf of battery manufacturer of product liability class actions alleging battery defects with Samsung Galaxy Note 7 smartphone; Schmidt, et al. v. Samsung Electronics America, et al. (W.D. Wash.)

  • Prevailed on summary judgment on behalf of electronics company’s Netherlands and Central European subsidiaries in embezzlement action against former employees; successfully recovered nearly the entirety of stolen funds; Samsung Electronics Central Eurasia, LLP v. Nauruzbayev (Santa Cruz Superior Court)

  • Prevailed in AAA arbitration on behalf of United States corporation in action asserting breach of commercial lease at historic property in San Francisco’s Presidio; Mason Street Warehouse Venture, LLC v. The Presidio Trust (AAA Commercial Arbitration)

  • Represented technology company in class actions challenging disclosures about computer hard drive storage capacity, including leading case regarding class action settlements; Cho v. Seagate Technology Holdings, Inc., 177 Cal. App. 4th 734 (2009)

  • Represented Taiwanese business owner before China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) in series of disputes arising out of sale of textile-related businesses

  • Represented a national bank in an action brought by franchisees of a tax preparation service in which plaintiffs asserted unfair business practices and sought to certify a nationwide class; obtained a complete dismissal of the action before any discovery had occurred

  • Conducted a highly publicized internal investigation of a 20+ billion-dollar insurance provider


  • University of California, Hastings, J.D., 2007, Hastings Law Journal
  • University of California, Santa Barbara, B.S. with highest honors, 2003
  • Extern for the Honorable Maxine M. Chesney, District Judge, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, 2005
  • Legal 500 U.S., Next Generation Lawyer, 2019–2020; “Recommended Lawyer” in Antitrust, 2019–2022; Antitrust: Cartel, 2023; Antitrust: Civil Litigation/Class Actions: Defense, 2023
  • Global Competition Review Award, Litigation of the Year – Cartel Defense, Motorola Mobility LLC v. AU Optronics Corp., 2015
  • American Bar Association, Section of Antitrust
  • State Bar of California, Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section
  • Bar Association of San Francisco, Antitrust Section
  • California
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
  • U.S. Court for the Ninth Circuit
  • Amnesty and Its Punishments: ACPERA and the Future of U.S. Antitrust Cartel Enforcement The Legal 500 Country Comparative Guides Hot Topic, April 2020
  • Why aren’t there more California below-cost pricing cases? Los Angeles & San Francisco Daily Journal, April 4, 2019
  • Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Vitamin C and the Future of U.S. Antitrust Enforcement Against Chinese Companies The Legal 500 – Cartels Country Comparative Guide, April 3, 2019
  • Algorithms, Artificial Intelligence and Joint Conduct Competition Policy International, May 16, 2017
  • When Illinois Brick Goes Abroad, Law360, March 13, 2015
  • Mask For The Guilty And Shield For The Innocent: The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination In Federal and California Antitrust Cases, Competition: The Journal of the Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section of the State Bar of California, Vol. 22, No. 2, Fall 2013
  • The Case For Eliminating ACPERA’s Supplemental Cooperation Requirement For Amnesty Applicants, Competition: The Journal of the Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section of the State Bar of California, Vol. 20, No. 2, Fall 2011