Antitrust Litigation

Apple May Be Planting Seeds Of Doubt In Appellate Challenge Of Antitrust Monitor

By Allison F. Sheedy Apple’s aggressive challenge to an external compliance monitor’s investigation into Apple’s antitrust compliance policies may be planting seeds of doubt that Apple hopes will bear fruit in its appeal of Judge Denise Cote’s decision in United States v. Apple, Inc. that Apple conspired to raise e-book prices. Apple is charging that the court-appointed monitor has unreasonably demanded...

DOJ’s Thumbs Down Scuttles Completed Merger Of Online Ratings And Review Companies

By Marlene Koury Last week’s victory of the U.S. Department of Justice (the “DOJ”) in its challenge to a consummated merger in U.S. v. Bazaarvoice Inc. shows that dominant companies that assume they are free to gobble up their main competitors if such consolidations do not meet the thresholds for reporting under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act (“HSR”) may be in for some rude awakenings. While the DOJ has not...

Supreme Court May Decide Future Of More Than Just Television Reception In Aereo Case

By Seth D. Greenstein On Friday, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in American Broadcasting Companies v. Aereo, Inc. (“Aereo”), the case that is now slated to decide the question of whether a company “publicly performs” a copyrighted television program by providing consumers a technology to receive and record a broadcast of that program via antenna and then transmit that recording to themselves over the...

Is the Apple Monitor Roving Far Afield?

By Ankur Kapoor In the latest skirmish in the e-books case of United States v. Apple, Inc., Apple has accused the external compliance monitor appointed by the court of conducting a “roving” and “unfettered” investigation into Apple’s business practices, including seeking to interview lead designer Jony Ive and board member and former Vice President Al Gore. Apple is now moving the U.S. District Court...

Court Closes The Book On Bookhouse Antitrust Claims Against Amazon And Publishers

By Allison F. Sheedy The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has dismissed antitrust claims against Amazon and the six largest book publishers related to the publishers’ contracts with Amazon for the distribution of e-books requiring the use of digital rights management software (“DRM”) in The Bookhouse of Stuyvesant Plaza, Inc. et al. v. Amazon.com, Inc. et al. The Bookhouse...

Patent Troll Survives Slings And Arrows Of Motion To Dismiss Antitrust Claims

By Jeffrey I. Shinder As Congress contemplates passing comprehensive legislation to deal with patent trolls, an intriguing antitrust case involving a defensive patent aggregator—an entity created to deal with such trolls—will proceed in federal court in San Francisco. The case, Cascades Computer Innovation LLC v. RPX Corporation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, was brought...

Cargo Shipping Companies’ Price Signaling Could Run Aground In EU Probe

By Jeffrey I. Shinder The steady stream of cartel investigations and lawsuits on both sides of the Atlantic in recent months highlights the need for vigilant antitrust enforcement to protect consumer welfare, despite the views of those, like the Wall Street Journal editorial page, who question the wisdom of antitrust law. These alleged cartels range from the apparently venal manipulations of the financial...

DOJ Allows American Airlines-US Airways Merger To Leave The Gate, But Will The Judge Clear It For Takeoff?

By Jeffrey I. Shinder and Ankur Kapoor

On November 20, 2013, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly set the stage for judicial review of the settlement that the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has reached to resolve its challenge of the proposed merger of American Airlines and US Airways.

The court’s order sets the schedule for the Tunney Act procedure, which is the congressionally mandated judicial...

NCAA Athletes Score On Injunctive Class Certification As Court Blocks Damage Claims

Former and current student athletes have achieved a major goal in their class action challenging National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”) rules permitting the use of their likenesses without compensation, convincing the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to certify a class for their claims for injunctive relief. The NCAA also scored in In re: NCAA Student-Athlete Name &...

All In All, Illinois Brick Won’t Be Another Brick In The Wall Against Indirect Purchaser Suits In Canada

The Supreme Court of Canada has decided not to import the U.S. bar to antitrust damage suits by indirect purchasers, rejecting the rule adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark case of Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, 431 U.S. 720 (1977). In three antitrust cases, the Canadian Supreme Court held that indirect purchasers could bring class actions seeking damages sustained as a result of overcharges passed on...