Partner

Carmine R. Zarlenga

Antitrust & Competition, Consumer Litigation & Class Actions, Food & Beverage Industry Class Actions

Overview

Carmine Zarlenga is a seasoned advocate who has handled a wide variety of complex antitrust, commercial litigation and intellectual property matters. During a career of over 25 years, he has appeared in over 50 different state and federal courts across the United States on behalf of some of the largest national and international companies in the world. He is recognized as a Washington DC "Super Lawyer."

Experience

  • Wysong Corp. v. APN, Inc., 266 F. Supp. 3d 1058 (E.D. Mich. 2017), aff’d, 889 F.3d 267 (6th Cir. 2018). Defeated a competitor’s Lanham Act false advertising complaint alleging that images on the company’s pet food packaging were false and deceptive. The court ruled that the plaintiff’s theory of deception was not plausible because the pet food labels in question were not false and were not likely to mislead a reasonable consumer. Persuaded both the District Court and the Court of Appeals that the challenged advertising was in accordance with industry standards and the common sense notion that consumers would not expect premium, human-grade ingredients in pet food.
  • Nespresso USA, Inc. v. Ethical Coffee Co. S.A., 263 F. Supp. 3d 498 (D. Del. 2017). Prevailed on motion to dismiss two Swiss entities for lack of personal jurisdiction. The District Court rejected several different alternative theories in its opinion, making this decision useful for other overseas entities named in US litigation without proper jurisdictional footing.
  • In re Chocolate Confectionary Antitrust Litigation, 999 F. Supp. 2d 777, (M.D. Pa. 2014), aff'd, 801 F.3d  383(3d Cir. 2015). Represented Nestle in a lengthy antitrust MDL involving several classes of plaintiffs as well as opt outs that filed direct actions.  Obtained summary judgment in an important ruling that limits the range of inferences that can be drawn from an alleged foreign price-fixing conspiracy.  Also prevailed on a Daubert challenge that had the practical effect of barring evidence of damages attributable to Nestle.  The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently affirmed the District Court's ruling in a unanimous opinion, thus ending the litigation.
  • Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. v. Airbus Helicopters, 78 F. Supp. 2d 253 (D.D.C. 2015).  Served as lead counsel for Airbus Helicopters at trial in this patent infringement action before Judge Robert Wilkins who at the time was sitting on the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.  Obtained a rare permanent injunction barring archrival’s use of innovative landing gear for the life of the applicable patent. 

Education

  • Ohio State University, BA, cum laude
  • University of Cincinnati College of Law , JD
    University of Cincinnati Law Review, Student Articles Editor (1982-1983)

Admissions

  • District of Columbia
  • Ohio

Courts

  • US Supreme Court
  • US District Court for the District of Maryland
  • US District Court for the District of Columbia
  • US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
  • US District Court for the Northern District of California
  • US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
  • US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
  • US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
  • US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
  • US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
  • US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

Languages

  • English

Professional & Community Involvement

  • University of Cincinnati Law Review Alumni Board
  • Board of Directors, Homestretch Inc. - a non-profit organization providing transitional housing to homeless families in Northern Virginia
Share