Teresa T. Bonder

Bonder, a 25-year-veteran of Alston & Bird LLP, moved from the Atlanta, Georgia, office in 2017 to open the firm's new San Francisco outpost as partner-in-charge. Since then, the office has doubled in size to 17 lawyers. She leads the firm's nationwide antitrust team.

"I was delighted to be asked to move back to the Bay Area, which I love," said Bonder, who graduated from UC Berkeley School of Law in 1991. She's been working remotely during the coronavirus pandemic. "I used to enjoy working from home one day a week when I could manage that," she said, "but now I really miss the office so much."

Along with her litigation duties, Bonder counsels clients on antitrust compliance matters. There, she said, her undergraduate degree in psychology comes in handy. "When reviewing your company's legacy email for potential antitrust problems, for instance, you look for elliptical language or code words, and psychology probably helps understand people's motivations along those lines," she said.

Bonder brought with her from Georgia a case in which plaintiffs alleged violations of federal antitrust laws by the city of LaGrange, Georgia. A municipal ordinance illegally tied water utility services and natural gas energy services, the complaint stated. People living outside the city limits were required to install gas appliances in order to receive water service from the city. Diverse Power, Inc. v. City of LaGrange, Georgia, 17-CV00003 (N.D. Ga., filed March 3, 2017).

A district court judge held LaGrange was not entitled to state-action immunity and denied its motion to dismiss. Bonder appealed to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The circuit panel affirmed, holding that political subdivisions like LaGrange are not themselves sovereign and do not receive all the federal deference accorded to states. Diverse Power Inc. v. City of LaGrange, Georgia, 18-11014 (11th Cir., op. filed Aug 20, 2019).

Back in district court, Bonder again moved to dismiss the suit, based on a decision by the city to rescind its ordinance. The plaintiffs tried to block the rescission. "They just wanted to keep suing us," she said.

"The repeal of the ordinance was a blatant attempt to manipulate this Court's jurisdiction," lawyers for the plaintiff wrote, contending that LaGrange has not established that its tying policy has ceased and will not recur and that injunctive and declaratory relief remain necessary.

"Plaintiff weaves a cobweb of arguments to convince the Court to sustain the litigation on life support," Bonder replied in court papers. Claims for relief "based on purely hypothetical future actions by LaGrange" cannot stand, she added. U.S. District Judge Timothy C. Batten Sr. of Atlanta agreed and ended the litigation.

-- John Roemer