Robert P. LoBue

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (New York)
Lawyer (Partner)

Robert LoBue served as Patterson Belknap’s Co-Chair and Managing Partner from February 2007 to March 2014, and has been a litigator with the firm for more than 30 years. He now serves as the firm’s Co-General Counsel. His practice includes both a first-seat role in many of the firm’s most significant complex antitrust and other business disputes as well as his long-time focus on intellectual property and First Amendment litigation and counseling. His extensive trial and appellate experience has earned him recognition in industry publications such as Chambers USA and Euromoney/Institutional Investor’s Benchmark: America’s Leading Litigation Firms and Attorneys. Chambers USA recognizes Mr. LoBue in the areas of Intellectual Property and Media and Entertainment and notes that he "stands out for his efficient and businesslike approach". Benchmark lists Mr. LoBue as a "Litigation Star" in both our top-ranked Litigation group, as well as our Intellectual Property Litigation group, which is ranked in the top tier nationally. At the request of retired federal judges, human rights organizations, and the American Bar Association, Mr. LoBue has filed several amicus briefs in the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal on human rights issues. He presently serves on the Task Force on National Security and the Rule of Law, and the Communications and Media Law Committee, of the New York City Bar Association.

Linked authors

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (New York)
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (New York)
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (New York)


919 Bulletin

Jonathan H. Hatch, Robert P. LoBue The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit potentially widens the opening for additional classes of plaintiffs to assert claims for antitrust injury (Hanover 3201 Realty / Village Supermarkets)


Third Circuit Provides Clarity to “Inextricably Intertwined” Basis of Antitrust Injury in Partially Reinstating Claims Against ShopRite* On November 12, 2015, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion partially reversing the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims in Hanover 3201 Realty, (...)

David S. Kleban, Robert P. LoBue The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California upholds assignment of antitrust claims to indirect purchasers (United Food / Teikoku Pharma)


Northern District of California Upholds Assignment of Antitrust Claims to Indirect Purchasers* Portions of a reverse payment suit against Endo Pharmaceuticals and others were recently dismissed by Judge William H. Orrick of the Northern District of California. The case [1] was brought by (...)

Jonathan H. Hatch, Robert P. LoBue, William Cavanaugh The US District Court for the Eastern District of New York reminds that potential defendants cases should be prepared to address a plaintiff’s “direct evidence” of harm to competition and may not be able to solely rely on its relative market share as a defence (American Express)


Court Rules Against American Express Based on Both Direct and Indirect Evidence of Harm to Competition* On February 19, 2015, the District Court for the Eastern District of New York issued its ruling on liability in United States v. American Express. Following a seven-week trial, the Court (...)

Jonathan H. Hatch, Robert P. LoBue The US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania allows “product hopping” claims to proceed based on allegations of removal of prior formulation and disparagement of generic competition (Suboxone)


Court Allows “Product Hopping” Claims to Proceed in Suboxone Litigation Based on Allegations of Removal of Prior Formulation and Disparagement of Generic Competition* We’ve previously discussed antitrust claims related to “product hopping”—allegations that pharmaceutical manufacturers have (...)

Jonathan H. Hatch, Robert P. LoBue The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit holds that it is fair to require foreign subsidiaries of American companies to seek a remedy in the courts of the country in which they choose to incorporate (Motorola / AU Optronics)


Seventh Circuit Affirms Dismissal of 99% of Motorola’s Claims in LCD Case Based on Motorola’s Lack of Standing* On the day before Thanksgiving—less than two weeks after oral argument—the Seventh Circuit issued its ruling on Motorola’s interlocutory appeal in Motorola Mobility LLC v. AU Optronics (...)

Send a message