Bingham

Bingham

Frank M. Hinman

Partner

Frank Hinman co-chairs Bingham’s Antitrust, Competition and Trade Regulation Practice Group.

Chambers USA has described Frank as a “talented antitrust attorney who provides excellent advice to clients.” He has been practicing antitrust law for more than 20 years and represents clients such as Intel, SanDisk and Oracle in all aspects of public and private antitrust enforcement, including international cartel cases, class actions, merger clearances and civil conduct investigations. He also provides day-to-day counseling on antitrust issues‚ with an emphasis on distribution and acquisition strategies. Frank is a past vice-chair of the ABA Antitrust Section’s Trade, Sports and Professional Associations Committee, is a contributor to many Section publications and speaks regularly on antitrust issues.

Frank has also handled appeals from many eight- to 10-figure judgments in state and federal appellate courts across the United States and has won approximately $170 million in reversals. He regularly advises trial counsel on appellate strategy and error preservation. He has been recognized as a leading Bay Area appellate practitioner.

Frank has been honored for his pro bono work by, among others, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area and California Lawyer magazine. He sits on the firm’s Diversity Executive Committee.

Experience

Antitrust

  • Oracle Corp. v. CedarCrestone — Represented Oracle with respect to antitrust counterclaims in IP dispute; dismissed
  • Representing premium consumer goods manufacturers in establishing North American and worldwide distribution system
  • Yardi Systems v. RealPage — Represented Yardi with respect to antitrust counterclaims in IP dispute
  • In re Intel Corporation Microprocessor Antitrust Litigation — Representing Intel in putative nationwide and California class actions under various state and federal antitrust laws
  • State of New York v. Intel Corp. — Represented Intel in action brought on behalf of New York public and private entities under New York and federal antitrust laws
  • Oliver v. Panasonic, et al. — Representing defendant in putative nationwide consumer class action challenging standards and licensing practices
  • Represented client in FTC investigation of vertical price restraints; investigation closed
  • In re Flash Memory Antitrust Litigation — Represented defendant in putative direct and indirect purchaser class actions;see 2010 U.S. Dist. Lexis 59491 (N.D. Cal.)
  • Represented client in multijurisdictional price-fixing investigation in freight forwarding industry
  • In re Walk-Ons Antitrust Litigation —Represented NCAA in Sherman Act case; see 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28824 (W.D. Wash.)

Appellate

  • Masters v. Boston Scientific — Judgment following bench trial reversed and judgment rendered for client in stock options dispute (9th Cir. 2010)
  • Tamraz v. Lincoln Elec. Co. et al. — Obtained JMOL in products liability case following a $20.5 million jury verdict (S.D. Ohio 2008)
  • Peters v. General Motors Corp. — Appeal from $82 million judgment in products case; reversed, 200 S.W.3d 1 (Mo. App. 2006) (en banc)
  • Myles v. General Motors Corp. — Appeal from $5.4 million judgment in products case; reversed, 905 So.2d 535 (Miss. 2005)
  • Jernigan v. General Motors Corp. — Appeal from $82 million judgment in products case; reversed, 883 So.2d 646 (Ala. 2003)
  • Covad Communications Corp. v. BellSouth — Appeal from dismissal of monopolization claims; reversed, 299 F.3d 1272 (11th Cir. 2002)
  • Bachman v. General Motors Corp. — Opposition to appeal from defense verdict in products case; affirmed, 776 N.E.2d 262 (Ill. App. 2002)
  • Tanaka v. Univ. of Southern California — Opposition to appeal from dismissal of antitrust case; affirmed, 252 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2001)
  • Harper v. General Motors Corp. — Appeal from $48 million judgment in products case; reversed, 61 S.W.3d 118 (Tex. App. 2001)
  • Vinci v. Waste Management Corp. — Opposition to appeal from dismissal of antitrust case; affirmed, 80 F.3d 1372 (9th Cir. 1996); 36 Cal. App. 4th 1811 (1996)

Events

  • Vertical ‘Hardcore’ Restrictions of Competition: An International Roundup, ABA Section of International Law Antitrust Law Committee Teleconference (2014)
  • The Antitrust-Labor Interface: Not Just for Pro Athletes, ABA Antitrust Section Spring Meeting (2012)
  • “Strange Bedfellows” — Ethical Considerations with Joint Defense Agreements in Civil & Criminal Antitrust Cases, ABA Antitrust Section Spring Meeting (2010)
  • Antitrust Developments: Some Observations and Predictions, Silicon Valley Association of General Counsel All Hands Meeting (2006)
  • A Merger Presentation to the Agencies: A Case Study, NERA Antitrust and Trade Regulation Seminar (2005)
  • U.S. v. First Data Corporation and Concord EFS, Inc., ABA Antitrust Section Spring Meeting (2004)

Publications

Memberships

  • American Bar Association, Section of Antitrust Law
  • Vice-chair, Trade, Sports and Professional Associations Committee of the ABA Section of Antitrust Law (2010-2012)
  • Associate editor, Antitrust (2002–2006), published by the ABA Section of Antitrust Law
  • State Bar of California, Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section
  • Bar Association of San Francisco

Awards & Honors

  • Phi Beta Kappa
  • Omicron Delta Epsilon Honor Society (Economics)
  • Best Lawyers, Antitrust Law (2010–2014)
  • Chambers USA, Antitrust (California) (2011–2014)
  • Super Lawyers, Antitrust (Northern California) (2011–2013)
  • Super Lawyers, Appellate (Northern California) (2004–2006)
  • California Lawyer Angel Award for pro bono representation
  • Keta Taylor Colby Pro Bono Award, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area

Legal insight. Business instinct. Global intelligence. ®