Bob Robicheaux has engaged in marketing research and offered expert testimony for more than four decades.  He was first qualified as an expert witness in marketing in Tennessee in the mid-1970s and he has since been qualified as a marketing expert in approximately 60 different legal matters in Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, Texas, Arizona, California and Washington, D.C.  From 1982 through 1993, he owned and operated Business Consulting and Research Associates, a marketing research company in Tuscaloosa, Alabama.  During that period he conducted numerous marketing research surveys for clients that included the BellSouth Advertising and Publishing Corporation (BAPCO), IBM, Colgate and others. He has owned and operated Robicheaux, LLC for 20 years.

Primary Areas of Engagement

In the LSU Ph.D. program, Bob was trained in marketing research, strategic marketing planning and management and inventory system design and management.  Through his education and experience, he has cultivated expertise in the following areas.

  • Interpreting sales and distribution agreements
  • Conducting and interpreting empirical research
  • Estimating market potential and forecasting sales
  • Evaluating the causes and nature of structural change in market competition
  • Calculating lost profits
  • Assessing the likelihood of confusion and/or dilution in trademark disputes
  • Assessing the value and legitimacy of sweepstakes promotions

Current Engagements

Matters in which Bob is currently engaged are summarized broadly here.

  1. Bob is working on a matter that involves a Plaintiff’s assertion that a former employee violated conditions of their employment contract including agreements to not disclose trade secrets, not compete with the plaintiff and to refrain from soliciting any business from a defined set of Plaintiff’s current customers. His focus in the matter is to assess the extent to which the Defendant violated the employment agreement conditions and the economic impact of those violations on the Plaintiff’s business.
  2. Bob is working on a matter in which Plaintiffs filed a complaint for declaratory judgment against Defendants who had charged Plaintiffs with the adoption of a trademark that is alleged to create a likelihood of confusion and infringe the Defendants’ trademark. His responsibilities in the matter include an analysis of the nature of the markets served and product s offered by the opposing parties and an evaluation of the likelihood of customer confusion based on factors relevant in the particular jurisdiction. In particular, he is focused on definitions of the relevant product markets.
  3. Bob is currently engaged as a representative of Defendants who are alleged by prevailing authorities to have employed marketing sweepstakes promotions in violation of state law. His responsibilities include an examination of the nature of the Defendants’ business model and, in particular, the role and relevance of sweepstakes promotions to promote the sale of legitimate products. He is focused particularly on demonstrating that the Defendants generate significant revenues and profits from legitimate online auctions and direct sales of products.

Historical Engagement in Selected Matters

Summarized below are a few projects in which Bob has been engaged. 

In the early 1980s, Bob was engaged by a consortium of companies that pursued authority to operate the first mobile cellular telephone operating companies in the United States.  The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) then planned to authorize one “wire line” and one “radio signal” operator in each market.  In other words, each market was to have one former telephone service provider and one radio operator to launch cellular telephone service in the U.S.

Bob’s responsibility was to collaborate with a team of experts and to provide estimates of the sales potential and initial annual sales forecasts for the then innovative cellular telephone service.  For 18 of the largest markets in the U.S., Bob designed and supervised research of potential target segments for cellular service and produced demand potential and sales estimates that formed a foundation for the engineering and financial proposals required for the client’s applications to the FCC for operating authority.

Summarized here are some matters in which Bob has been engaged in recent years.


W.R. Huff Asset Management Co., LLC, et al., v. Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co., L.P., et al., No. CV-1999-004487-JLB
27001 Partnership, et al., v. BT Securities Corp., et al., No. CV-2004-007487-JLB,
In the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama

This case involved a complaint by bondholders who alleged that Defendants had falsely represented the current business situation and competitive position of a major supermarket chain in the southeastern U.S. in a major bond offering.  Bob’s  testimony focused on an analysis of the retailer’s position during the years leading up to its sale to Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. LP (KKR) and the nature of competition that erupted in the mid-1990s throughout the retailer’s markets from big-box supercenters that dramatically affected the performance of traditional supermarket chains, especially those located in the southern United States.


Cynthia Richter et al. v. Dolgencorp, Inc. et al., U.S. District Court Northern District of Alabama Western Division, Civil Action 7:06-CV-01537-LSC.  Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP, Dallas, Texas.

This matter involved a class action lawsuit brought against Dolgencorp, Inc. (d/b/a Dollar General).  Plaintiffs complained that the retailer had discriminated against employees who were classified as “managers” which allowed them to be denied over-time compensation.  Bob’s testimony focused on the common nature of retail store operations and managerial responsibilities of retail employees.


North Alabama Medical Center, Certificate of Need for Replacement Hospital in Lauderdale County, Project Number AL 2012-2013, Baker Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowicz.

The matter involved an effort by existing hospitals in Lauderdale County in Northwest Alabama to deny a Certificate of Need (CON) Application or limit the size of a new hospital planned for that community.  In Alabama, the State Health Planning & Development Agency (SHPA) administers the CON program.  To analyze the potential impacts of the applicants’ proposed construction plans, the Huff Model (gravity analysis) was employed to forecast the proposed new hospital’s likely draw of patients from existing hospitals in Alabama, Mississippi and Tennessee.  The analysis suggested that the new hospital as proposed would lower the plaintiff’s patient counts to levels below the hospital’s breakeven level.  The CON application was approved but the size (bed count) of the new hospital was restricted.


State of Texas v. Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, EP-99-CA-320-HLL, Luebben, Johnson and Barnhouse, Albuquerque NM, Randolph.

The State of Texas alleged that Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, a Native American Tribe of Tiguas in El Paso, was engaged in illegal gambling activities in two entertainment centers.  The tribe awarded sweepstakes entries to entertainment center patrons who made donations to support the tribe’s community services.  Bob testified that the sweepstakes promotion was identical in form and character to promotions used my numerous non-profit and for-profit organizations.  He provided evidence from scholarly publications that donations are made by individuals and groups to obtain “value” in exchange for their financial contributions.  Hence, he argued, the sweepstakes promotion prizes were not purchased chances to win prizes.  Rather, they were promotional incentives and the sweepstakes program met all requirements for sweepstakes promotions in Texas.


In the Matter of USITC 53-Foot Domestic Dry Containers from China. Inv. No. 701-TA-514 and 731-TA-1250. Before The U.S. International Trade Commission, April 16, 2015.

A United States manufacturer of trailers used in domestic and international commerce to transport products by water, rail and highway complained to the International Trade Commission (ITC) that a foreign manufacturer of 53-foot dry containers was engaged in illegal “dumping” practices.  Bob offered oral and written testimony to the ITC that focused on the nature of foreign and domestic carrier operations for particularly durable and waterproof shipping containers needed to survive long-distance transportation and harsh conditions related to multiple loading and unloading of such containers.  The testimony addressed the failure of the U.S. competitor to produce competitive products and defended decisions by U.S. domestic trucking and rail carriers to rely on the more effective and efficient foreign-produced products.  The testimony reported the willingness of the U.S. transportation companies to collaborate with U.S. container manufacturers to produce products to meet the shippers’ and carriers’ requirements.




North Carolina Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission vs. Osei Enterprises, LLC T/A Osei Food and Beverage,  State of North Carolina, County of Wake,  Office of Administrative Hearings, David Sutton, Administrative Law Judge.

Bob represented a Georgia-based company in defense of its use of sweepstakes promotions to promote an online marketing program to sell a variety of products to retail consumers.  Bob collaborated with a leading domestic expert on the computer systems that drive sweepstakes promotion award programs and offered testimony in multiple cases in North Carolina.