Scott Grzenczyk has wide-ranging experience in all aspects of complex litigation and has served as a member of leadership teams that have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars on behalf of plaintiffs. Scott brings a tireless work ethic and a practical, results-oriented approach to his cases, believing that the best results are achieved by looking at each case holistically and using creative strategies to overcome challenges. He has successfully applied this thoughtful, dedicated approach to representing plaintiffs in antitrust and consumer protection matters, among others.
For nearly a decade, Scott has represented union health and welfare funds in cases alleging that large, multinational drug companies illegally inflated the price of prescription drugs. He has an in-depth knowledge of the pharmaceutical industry and the unique challenges that come with prosecuting antitrust claims against drug companies, which has helped him to achieve precedent-setting recoveries, including a $104.75 million settlement shortly before trial in a case concerning the prescription drug Lidoderm. He plays a central role in the end-payors’ efforts in In re Generic Pharmaceuticals Antitrust Litigation and In re Xyrem Antitrust Litigation, as well as the recently-settled In re Restasis Antitrust Litigation, in which he led the end-payors’ successful bid to obtain class certification. Scott is also a key member of the co-lead counsel teams in antitrust cases outside of the pharmaceutical industry, including In re Google Digital Advertising Antitrust Litigation and In re California Gasoline Spot Market Antitrust Litigation.
Scott also serves on the co-lead counsel team in In re JUUL Labs, Inc. Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation, and has taken primary responsibility for legal briefing and discovery related to the plaintiffs’ class action claims. He has a track record of successfully representing consumers, including car and cell phone purchasers, in cases involving fraud and unfair business practices. Among other cases, Scott led the firm’s litigation efforts in a class action filed by native inhabitants of Guam bringing due process and equal protection claims against the government of Guam. During law school, he successfully argued a precedent-setting immigration case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Scott also volunteers with the Federal Pro Bono Project of the Bar Association of San Francisco, currently representing a plaintiff who alleges the San Francisco Zen Center discriminated against him on the basis of his disability in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
In addition to his work in the courts, Scott serves in the leadership of the Antitrust Section of the American Bar Association, and regularly speaks and writes on discovery and antitrust issues. He has been selected as a Rising Star in Northern California by Super Lawyers since 2013, was named to Best Lawyers’ “Ones to Watch” list in 2021 and 2022, and received the American Antitrust Institute’s Outstanding Litigation Achievement by a Young Lawyer award in 2020.
J.D., University of California, Davis School of Law (King Hall)
- Order of the Barristers
- Chair, Moot Court Board
- Moot Court Best Brief and Best Oral Advocate
- Executive editor, UC Davis Journal of International Law & Policy
B.A., Princeton University
- Central District of California
- Eastern District of California
- Northern District of California
- Southern District of California
- Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- Northern District of Illinois
In re JUUL Labs, Inc. Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation
Member of the firm’s co-lead counsel team in litigation concerning JUUL’s marketing and sales of its e-cigarette products, with responsibility for legal strategy, briefing, and discovery for the plaintiffs’ class action claims.
In re Google Digital Advertising Antitrust Litigation
Core member of firm’s efforts as co-lead counsel to challenge Google’s monopolistic practices in the “Ad Tech Stack” – the technology platforms that advertisers use to place ads on websites and other digital spaces. Litigation is ongoing.
In re Generic Pharmaceuticals Antitrust Litigation
A sprawling nationwide litigation alleging that many of the world’s largest drug makers conspired to prevent competition and raise prices through the pharmaceutical industry since at least 2011. Scott plays a central role in the firm’s efforts as a member of the End-Payer Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee, and works on the team overseeing the expert work on behalf of the end-payors. Litigation is ongoing.
In re Xyrem Antitrust Litigation
Member of the co-lead counsel team prosecuting claims that Jazz—the manufacturer of the prescription drug Xyrem—and would-be generic defendants unlawfully delayed the release of generic Xyrem, causing consumers, insurers, and other payors to overpay for their prescriptions by hundreds of millions of dollars. Litigation is ongoing.
In re Lincoln National COI Litigation
Leads the firm’s efforts as co-lead counsel is case challenging Lincoln National Life Insurance’s Company’s decision in 2019 to raise cost of insurance rates and premiums on policyholders for reasons not permitted under the insurance contracts. Litigation is ongoing.
In re California Gasoline Spot Market Antitrust Litigation
Key member of the co-lead counsel team in litigation alleging that gasoline traders artificially manipulated the price of gasoline throughout the state of California. Litigation is ongoing.
In re Restasis Antitrust Litigation
Member of the antitrust team that served as court-appointed co-lead counsel in a case alleging that Allergan used fraudulent patents and baseless petitions to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to preserve its monopoly for the drug Restasis by preventing generic versions from coming onto the market. Scott played a critical role in all aspects of the litigation, and led the end-payors successful efforts to certify the class. Litigation settled for $30 million.
In re Lidoderm Antitrust Litigation
Served as a key member of the leadership team on behalf of consumers and third-party payers who alleged that two drug companies, Endo Pharmaceuticals and Teikoku Pharma, unlawfully paid a third, Watson Pharmaceuticals, to delay the launch of less expensive generic lidocaine patches. After obtaining certification of the end-payer class and defeating defendants’ summary judgment motion, the case settled shortly before trial for $104.75 million.
In re Aggrenox Antitrust Litigation, In re Solodyn Antitrust Litigation, In re Niaspan Antitrust Litigation
The firm was appointed to the Executive Committees in these “pay-for-delay” cases. Scott was responsible for overseeing discovery of the firm’s clients, including defending them at their depositions. Aggrenox and Solodyn settled for $54 million and $45 million, respectively, and the Niaspan litigation is ongoing.
Crawford v. Government of Guam
Lead the firm’s representation of native inhabitants of Guam and their families that lost their land during World War II and did not have it returned. The suit alleged that the government of Guam, which currently occupies the land, has violated the due process and equal protection clause of the United States Constitution.
In re Hyundai and Kia Fuel Economy Litigation
The firm served as liaison counsel in litigation alleging that Hyundai and Kia misrepresented the fuel economy ratings of several of their vehicles, which settled for over $200 million. Scott served as the primary associate for the firm on all matters including briefing and depositions.
Honors and Awards
Honors and Awards
- Named to the Northern California Super Lawyers "Rising Stars" list (2013-present)
- Named to Best Lawyers Ones to Watch (2021-2022)
- Winner of the American Antitrust Institute's, "Outstanding Antitrust Litigation Achievement by a Young Lawyer" (2020)
Community & Professional
- American Bar Association
- Member, Antitrust Section
- Editor, Antitrust Law Developments - Annual Review Publication, Antitrust Section (2022-2023)
- California Lawyers Association
- Member, Antitrust, UCL, and Privacy Section and Litigation Sections
- American Antitrust Institute10.21.2019