Antitrust Litigation

Supreme Court Declines Review Of Strict Price Discrimination Standard

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review Feesers, Inc. v. Michael Foods, Inc., 591 F.3d 191 (3d Cir. 2010), cert. denied, No. 09-1499, a competitor price-discrimination action brought under the Robinson-Patman Act, after the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit instructed the district court to enter judgment as a matter of law for the defendants. If adopted by other circuits, the legal standard articulated...

Court Puts Phone Depositions On Do Not Call List In Marine Hose Antitrust Litigation

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida has denied a motion by class action plaintiffs in the In re Marine Hose Antitrust Litigation case to take “trial depositions” of foreign-based witnesses by telephone, including corporate executives residing in Japan, France, and Italy. The executives are employees of corporations that are in the process of settling the ongoing class action,...

Skyhook Sues Google Over Location Positioning Technology

The competitive battle between Google and Skyhook Wireless to provide cutting-edge location positioning technology for such devices as mobile phones and laptops has found a new location for conflict – the courtroom. Skyhook, a company that provides mobile software for determining location using nearby Wi-Fi signals, has filed a lawsuit against in Massachusetts Superior Court alleging that Google unfairly...

Ninth Circuit Holds Labor Dispute No Excuse For Anticompetitive Profit-Sharing Agreement Among California Supermarkets

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has held that a profit-sharing agreement among the grocery store defendants in California v. Safeway, Ralph’s, Von’s, Albertson’s and Food4Less violated the Sherman Act, despite the supermarkets’ defense that the agreement was intended to respond to a labor dispute, not to eliminate competition. The Court of Appeals reversed the district court ruling, and held...

NOT DEAD YET: Third Circuit Almost, But Not Quite, Kills Massive Suit Against Insurers

The Third Circuit has affirmed the dismissal of most of the claims in a massive antitrust class action against most of America’s biggest insurance companies. Due to their failure to meet heightened pleading requirements, the plaintiffs in In re: Employee Benefit Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litigation will not be able to pursue their claims of per se violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.  The plaintiffs...

Gambling Company Rolls Dice On Lawsuit And Comes Up Snake-Eyes

Thanks to a Nevada federal judge that dismissed its antitrust suit, casino payment company Sightline Payments, LLC, might be experiencing some fear and loathing in Las Vegas. In March, Sightline sued its larger competitor, Global Cash Access Holdings, Inc., under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, and under Section 7 of the Clayton Act.  Both companies offer services to provide cash access at casinos. ...

Third Circuit Gives Failing Grade To Indirect Purchasers Seeking National Class For State Antitrust Claims

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has ruled that state antitrust laws’ treatment of indirect purchaser claims are too disparate to meet the predominance and commonality requirements of Rule 23. In Sullivan v. DB Investments Inc., plaintiffs alleged anticompetitive conduct in the diamond industry by the De Beers group of companies, the South African conglomerate synonymous with diamond production and...

iPhone Antitrust Suit Clears Class Certification Hurdle

Judge James Ware of the Northern District of California has granted a motion for certification of a class of iPhone consumers in an antitrust suit against Apple and AT&T.  An estimated 15 to 20 million U.S. iPhone purchasers are potential members of the class. Filed in 2007, the suit alleges that Apple and AT&T secretly agreed to restrict iPhone service for five years.  Although plaintiffs purchased a two-year...

Sirius XM Seeks To Block Consumers’ Transmission Of Claims Across State Lines

Sirius XM Radio, the holding company for the two satellite radio services operating in the U.S., is asking a federal court in Manhattan to dismiss state claims being asserted by class action representatives who reside in other states. Sirius XM is asking Judge Harold Baer to rule that the class representatives do not have standing to assert claims based on the laws of states in which they do not reside in Blessing...

Justice Scalia Supports Class Actions. Justice Ginsburg Doesn't. Really.

Despite a recent federal law that clamps down on class actions, the Supreme Court on Wednesday breathed new life into the viability of some such cases – and in their 70-some pages of opinions, scrambled the Court’s usual ideological lines. In the case, Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. Allstate Insurance Co., No. 08-1008, a group of doctors sued an insurance company when it paid an insurance claim...