View Selected Experts

We examine every case to identify the most effective expert witnesses.

We examine every case to identify the most effective expert witnesses.

Andrew Sweeting

Professor, Department of Economics,
University of Maryland, College Park;
Former Director, Bureau of Economics,
U.S. Federal Trade Commission

Andrew Sweeting is a former director of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC’s) Bureau of Economics. An industrial organization economist, Professor Sweeting specializes in competition and antitrust, including merger analysis, applied econometrics, and structural modeling.

While at the FTC, Professor Sweeting oversaw many merger investigations conducted by the Agency, and was director when the 2020 Vertical Merger Guidelines were released. He was also involved in high-profile consumer protection investigations, including several related to digital platforms and data security. In addition to his tenure at the FTC, Professor Sweeting has served as an academic visitor at the U.S. Department of Justice’s Economic Analysis Group, and as an expert on the Academic Panel of the U.K. Competition Commission (now the U.K. Competition and Markets Authority).

In his wide-ranging research, Professor Sweeting has analyzed the impact of mergers on prices, product variety, and product repositioning. He has also addressed collusion in wholesale electricity markets, the performance of different auction designs, dynamic pricing in online resale markets, and the effects of alternative copyright policies in the radio industry. In addition, he has researched the effect of government bailouts, how targeted advertising affects market structure and competition, and firms’ strategic use of pricing and capacity choices to influence future competition.

Professor Sweeting has conducted empirical research in a range of industries, including radio, television, advertising, consumer packaged goods, energy markets, online resale markets, transportation, and government procurement and timber auctions.

A widely published author, Professor Sweeting’s work has appeared in leading economics journals, such as Econometrica, the American Economic Review, the Journal of Political Economy, and the RAND Journal of Economics. He has been awarded several multiyear research grants from the National Science Foundation. In 2018, he received the Robert F. Lanzillotti Prize for the best paper in antitrust economics for a coauthored article on post-merger repositioning in the airline industry.

Professor Sweeting is a former editor of the Journal of Industrial Economics and a former foreign editor of the Review of Economic Studies. He is a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) and a research fellow of the Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR).

In his more than two decades as an educator, Professor Sweeting has been honored numerous times for excellence in teaching. Before joining the faculty of the University of Maryland, he held positions at Duke University, Northwestern University, and St. Catherine’s College, Oxford.

We examine every case to identify the most effective expert witnesses.

Margaret K. Kyle

Chair in Intellectual Property and Markets for Technology,
MINES ParisTech

Margaret Kyle is a noted authority on competition, intellectual property (IP), and innovation, with extensive multinational experience with life sciences and healthcare topics.

Professor Kyle has been retained as an expert witness in multiple matters and has significant testifying experience, including at trial. She has provided testimony on a range of issues, including damages related to alleged product misrepresentation, pricing of pharmaceutical products, and nascent competition. The global Women@Competition platform named Professor Kyle among forty notable women competition professionals in their forties.

In her academic work, Professor Kyle has examined the impact of antitrust, trade, and IP policies on R&D investment, innovation, and competition. In particular, Professor Kyle has substantive experience with issues related to pricing of pharmaceutical products, R&D productivity, new product distribution, and competition between branded and generic pharmaceutical products. In addition, she has written about antitrust merger enforcement issues in pharmaceutical markets, with applications to other dynamic markets characterized by innovation. In the context of COVID-19, she has analyzed how incentives can promote the development of new medical technologies and advance the rapid manufacture of tests and treatments.

Professor Kyle’s previous positions include visiting professor of strategy at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management; visiting scholar at the Center for the Study of Income and Productivity at the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco; professor at the Toulouse School of Economics; assistant professor at the London Business School, Duke University, and Carnegie Mellon University; and visiting professor at the University of Hong Kong.

Professor Kyle consults to policy entities in the United States, Europe, and the UK on competition, economics, and innovation topics. She is a member of DG Competition’s Economic Advisory Group on Competition Policy. At France’s Conseil National de Productivité, which advises the French Prime Minister and the Minister of Economic Affairs, she is one of eleven independent academic economists analyzing the country’s productivity and competitiveness, particularly issues linked to the Euro Zone. She coauthored a note on policies to encourage pharmaceutical innovation for France’s Conseil d’Analyse Économique. In the UK, Professor Kyle serves on the Research Committee for the Office of Health Economics.

Professor Kyle has coauthored chapters in the Handbook of Health Economics, the Oxford Handbook of the Economics of the Biopharmaceutical Industry, and Elsevier’s Encyclopedia of Health Economics. Her academic papers have been published in leading economics, strategy, and health policy journals. She is associate editor of the International Journal of Industrial Organization. Professor Kyle has been invited to speak at numerous conferences on issues such as nascent competition, reverse payment patent settlements, and excessive pricing.

We examine every case to identify the most effective expert witnesses.

Vivek Mani


Vivek Mani has over a decade of experience leading teams and consulting to clients on regulatory and litigation issues involving competition. His expertise includes collective actions, cartels, and mergers in Europe and the United States. Mr. Mani has analyzed relevant markets, competitive effects, and damages in numerous competition matters. Who’s Who Legal has recognized him as a future leader in the competition field.

Mr. Mani also has experience in sampling and survey design, conducting and critiquing surveys as part of Phase II merger inquiries in Europe. In financial markets, Mr. Mani has addressed allegations of price fixing in various financial instruments. His competition experience covers a range of sectors, including automobiles, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, retail, telecommunications, and trucks.

In intellectual property matters, Mr. Mani has addressed issues related to market analysis, lost profits assessments, damages, and determination of reasonable royalty rates.

Mr. Mani has coauthored articles on competition analysis in local markets, economic analysis in class certification, economic approaches to remedies in trade secrets cases, and the economics of excessive pricing. He has also spoken on panels on collective actions and the pharmaceutical sector.

Mr. Mani is a member of Cornerstone Research’s Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Council.

We examine every case to identify the most effective expert witnesses.

Lorin M. Hitt

Zhang Jindong Professor of Operations, Information, and Decisions,
The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania;
Senior Advisor, Cornerstone Research

Professor Lorin Hitt is an expert in applied econometrics and the economics of information and information technology. He focuses on the role of information in consumer behavior, firm organization, and market structure.

Professor Hitt researches how information and technology create economic value, how goods and services are priced, how competition works in information intensive industries, and how consumers search and use information in their decision-making, among other topics. His academic research and teaching cover a variety of empirical methods used in economic research, including models for estimating demand and supply, pricing products, measuring the effect of external events on market prices, and valuing individual product features in differentiated products.

Professor Hitt’s research has been published in leading economics and management journals, including the Quarterly Journal of Economics, the Review of Economics and Statistics, the Journal of Economic PerspectivesBrookings Papers on Economic ActivityManagement Science, and Information Systems Research.

At the Wharton School and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Professor Hitt has taught courses on competition and customer pricing, information systems management, the economics of technology, and data analysis. He has won the annual Wharton Undergraduate Teaching Award more than ten times, and has also been honored with the Wharton-wide Hauck Award and the University of Pennsylvania-wide Lindback Award for distinguished teaching.

Professor Hitt has been retained in numerous product liability, intellectual property, antitrust, and breach of contract cases. He has testified in several high-profile matters, including the Volkswagen “Clean Diesel” Litigation (Nemet et al. v. Volkswagen); Johannessohn et al. v. Polaris Industries Inc.Buckeye Tree Lodge and Sequoia Village Inn LLC v. Expedia Inc. et al.In Re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation; and Stragent LLC et al. v. Intel Corp. In Nemet et al., the judge dismissed the case, finding the plaintiffs’ analyses to be unreliable and inadmissible due to critical flaws that Professor Hitt identified.

In multiple product liability matters, Professor Hitt has analyzed the value of a product or product features. He has substantial experience addressing class certification and damages issues, including analyzing market price data and evaluating proposed damages methods such as hedonic price analyses, difference-in-differences regression analyses, and conjoint analyses.

Professor Hitt has also served as an expert witness in antitrust matters involving allegations of price fixing and collusion. In intellectual property matters, he has opined on patent damages and on methods to assess the value of alleged infringed product features.

Competition Capabilities

Expert Assessments of Complex Economic Issues

We help clients navigate all stages of merger investigations, whether they are in front of national competition authorities, the European Commission or are subject to regulatory scrutiny on both sides of the Atlantic and elsewhere.

Our experts’ deep knowledge of our clients’ markets supports relevant and robust economic and econometric evidence for investigations. Counsel also benefit from our deep expertise of competition economics, accounting, data science and survey methods.


‘Horizontal’ co-operation agreements are between competitors at the same level of the supply chain. In these matters, we assess the economic incentives of the alleged participants, and test hypotheses that distinguish competitive from collusive behaviour. We assist on cases involving:

  • Research and development agreements
  • Production agreements, including subcontracting and specialisation
  • Purchasing agreements
  • Commercialisation agreements
  • Standardisation agreements
  • Information exchange

‘Vertical’ co-operation agreements are between market participants at different levels of the supply chain. The European Commission’s Vertical Restraints guidelines accept that competition concerns can only arise from vertical agreements if there is insufficient competition at one or more levels of the supply chain, i.e. at the supplier and/or buyer levels. Moreover, vertical restraints are generally less harmful than horizontal restraints and may provide substantial scope for efficiencies.


Private actions for damages can be stand-alone allegations of anti-competitive conduct or agreements pursued through the courts. Alternatively, they may ‘follow-on’ from a competition agency’s decision that a firm’s conduct amounted to an abuse of dominance or formed part of an illegal anti-competitive agreement.

Cornerstone Research experts have deep expertise in assessing both the substance of allegations in stand-alone cases and also, in particular, the quantum of competition damages in follow-on cases.

  • Damages from cartels or other anti-competitive horizontal agreements
  • Damages from anti-competitive vertical agreements
  • Damages from exclusionary or exploitative abuse by a dominant firm

In cases with accounting allegations, we have evaluated class certification, market efficiency, loss causation, and damages issues. We also have used accounting data to estimate possible settlement outcomes.

We have addressed these issues in a wide range of securities cases, including those involving publicly traded equities, debt securities, derivatives, and other complex financial instruments. We have worked on breach of contract cases and cases arising from failures of privately held firms. In Rule 10b-5 and Section 11 and 12 cases, we have experience in analyzing restatements, developing “but-for” financial statements, analyzing the materiality of financial statement items, and evaluating information available to market participants to determine whether the accounting issues had a material effect on share prices.


Our experts have deep experience of market investigations (sector inquiries). Specifically, we have worked to support clients in such cases in a number of jurisdictions including in front of the CMA in the UK.


EU Member states sometimes subsidise undertakings on a selective basis. Such subsidies could take many forms including tax relief, guarantees, or providing goods and services on preferential terms.

State aid measures are those which affect trade between member states and, in particular, would distort competition by providing the recipient with advantages on a selective basis, for example to specific companies or industry sectors, or to companies located in specific regions.


Featured Cases and Publications

12 August 2021

A Tale of Two Sides: Sabre/Farelogix in the United States and the U.K.

The authors discuss the differing conclusions of the U.S. and U.K. courts in the proposed Sabre/Farelogix merger in this Journal of European Compet...

19 February 2021

Taming Gatekeepers—But Which Ones?

The authors discuss approaches that have been proposed in the EU, UK and Germany to prevent potential anticompetitive conduct by dominant companies...

11 December 2020

Economic Principles and the Reform of the European Commission’s Approach to Vertical Agreements

The authors outline five economic principles that should guide the European Commission’s revision of VBER and its Vertical Guidelines.

1 April 2020

Financial Reporting Investigation Following SEC Inquiry

Cornerstone Research was retained by counsel for an investigation into an entity’s financial statement close and reporting process in response to i...

5 March 2019

EC’s Phase II Investigation of Essilor/Luxottica Merger

The Commission cleared the proposed merger unconditionally finding the parties would not gain market power to harm competition.

How can we help you?

For more information or assistance with a specific matter, please contact us.