Albina Gasanbekova
Albina Gasanbekova is an Associate at Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP, specializing in international disputes and litigation. She has been with the firm since August 2016. Additionally, Albina serves as the Executive Editor for ITA in Review at the Institute for Transnational Arbitration. Her prior roles include working as a Legal Consultant at The World Bank and interning at the Office of the New York State Attorney General and the Supreme Commercial Court of Russia. She holds an LL.M. in International Law and International Arbitration from Georgetown University Law Center and a Law Degree in Civil Law from the Russian Academy of Justice. Albina's career is marked by a focus on international legal matters.
Breast Cancer – An In-Depth Analysis of 3 Delayed Diagnosis Cases
Delayed breast cancer diagnoses often stem from misread imaging, miscommunication, or failure to follow up, raising complex medical malpractice and legal challenges.
Posted on October 19, 2015 in Misdiagnosis & Expert Witness
Econometrics Expert Witness Opines on Pharmaceutical Antitrust Lawsuit
An econometrics expert witness analyzes class-wide impact in a pharmaceutical antitrust lawsuit over alleged efforts to block generic Paxil competition, facing a Daubert challenge.
Posted on October 28, 2015 in Class Actions & Class Actions & Reports & Testimony & Expert Witness
Econometrics Expert Witness Comments on Mushroom Price Fixing
An econometrics expert witness analyzes antitrust claims in a mushroom price-fixing case, with disputes over statistical methods, class-wide damages, and expert qualifications.
Posted on October 28, 2015 in Class Actions & Corporate Fraud & Class Actions & Expert Witness
Chocolate Companies Engaged in Price Fixing – Econometrics Expert Witness
In re: Chocolate Confectionery Antitrust Litigation United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania.December 7, 2012 90 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 36 Background: Direct purchasers of chocolate candy products brought an action against several chocolate producers, asserting antitrust claims under Section 1 of Sherman Act and violations of state antitrust and consumer protection statutes. This is based on allegations
Posted on October 28, 2015 in Class Actions & Consumer Fraud & Class Actions & Expert Witness