170 results for 'cat:"Antitrust"'.
J. Tharp partially grants a health care networking service’s motion to compel the production of documents from a number of pharmacies. The pharmacies allege the health care networking service has an illegal monopoly over e-prescription routing and patient eligibility transmission. The court compels the pharmacies to produce sales records of prescription medications to Michigan patients, but declines the networking service’s request for the pharmacies to produce a privilege log.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Tharp, Filed On: March 20, 2024, Case #: 1:19cv6627, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Health Care, Discovery
J. Castel dismisses the satellite TV provider's antitrust claims against three broadcasters whom it alleges sought to charge it supra-competitive fees to re-broadcast certain popular television shows. The satellite provider chose not to renew its agreements with these broadcasters due to the quoted prices, causing content blackouts for its subscribers and the loss of thousands of customers. Because the provider never actually entered into an agreement which would have required it to pay supra-competitive fees, its injury is not the type that antitrust laws were intended to prevent.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Castel, Filed On: March 20, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv2221, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Communications
J. Parker finds that the district court improperly dismissed antitrust and tortious interference claims by one drugmaker against another in a dispute over delivery of a prescription medication to treat an eye condition that can cause blindness. The product market to be considered should have been limited to the one-step prefilled syringe injection method, which plaintiff drugmaker claimed defendant drugmaker, working with a third-party "filler" they both used, attempted to dominate through anticompetitive, secret agreements. Furthermore, plaintiff drugmaker adequately alleges that it was kept from learning about defendant drugmaker's contractual interference until the statute of limitations expired. Reversed.
Court: 2nd Circuit, Judge: Parker, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 22-0427-cv, Categories: antitrust, Interference With Contract
J. Chun dismisses with prejudice the consumers' second amended complaint accusing Amazon of putting products by sellers who purchased Amazon fulfillment services higher in searches and featuring them in its "Buy Box" more often than sellers that did not purchase the fulfillment services. The consumers allege that Amazon injured them with anti-competitive behavior because the consumers paid higher prices for products through Amazon's marketplace, but the consumers do not allege that they paid more for their Amazon Prime membership or that they paid more for shipping, so they do not allege that they suffered anti-trust injury in the shipping market.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Chun, Filed On: March 13, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv996, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Strickland denies dairy cooperatives' motion to dismiss, ruling that although the initial price-fixing actions alleged by the dairy farmers took place in 2015 — well outside the four-year statute of limitations for antitrust claims — there is a viable “continuing violation” claim because the price decreases could not be sustained without repeated action on the part of the cooperatives.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Strickland, Filed On: March 11, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv251, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Civil Procedure
J. Dick grants a request by the creator of a technology to manufacture fiber-glass plastic pipes used in large scale water projects, dismissing claims of anti-trust violations by a supplier of the pipes. The pipe supplier claims an anti-trust injury from the inventor’s alleged breach or termination of a license agreement, which does not support an anti-trust injury.
Court: USDC Middle District of Louisiana, Judge: Dick, Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv259, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: antitrust, Corporations, Construction
J. Simon grants LegitScript's motion to certify the order for interlocutory appeal regarding PharmacyChecker.com's complaint alleging that LegitScript enacted a conspiracy with the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy, the Alliance for Safe Online Pharmacies and the Center for Safe Internet Pharmacies Ltd. to restrain market competition for online pharmacy verification services and comparative drug pricing information. While LegitScript asks some broad questions for certification, such as “What deprives a plaintiff of antitrust standing?," it sufficiently argues that PharmacyChecker potentially facilitating another unlawful activity might prevent antitrust standing, which could affect other antitrust cases.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Simon, Filed On: March 7, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv252, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust
J. Lipman mostly denies the Varsity defendants' motion to exclude certain expert testimony in this antitrust lawsuit regarding the cheerleading industry, specifically concerning the prices associated with "competitive cheerleading competitions and camps." The defendants have not shown that the expert's methodology "in defining the cheer competition market" is unreliable. Their motion is granted, however, as to the expert's opinions "regarding Varsity's intent."
Court: USDC Western District of Tennessee , Judge: Lipman, Filed On: March 6, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv2892, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Experts
J. Lipman mostly denies the Varsity defendants' motion to exclude certain expert testimony in this antitrust lawsuit involving the cheerleading industry. The Varsity defendants' argument concerning the data used "to calculate relevant sales is a factual dispute suitable for cross-examination." Their motion is granted, however, as to the expert's "damages calculations for states in which Indirect Purchasers are not pursuing damages."
Court: USDC Western District of Tennessee , Judge: Lipman, Filed On: March 6, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv2892, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Damages, Experts
J. Friedman, upon remand from the D.C. Circuit, excludes certain exhibits in a group of purchasers of rail freight services' antitrust against railway companies. The D.C. Circuit determined that internal documents concerning interline movements are inadmissible.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Friedman, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 1:07mc489, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Transportation, Discovery
J. Du grants the ranchers' motion to dismiss a Peruvian work visa worker's allegation the ranch association and member ranches restrained trade for the purpose of wage-fixing. Though the worker has not sufficiently alleged each ranch specifically engaged in an anti-competitive agreement, allegations the association made an unlawful agreement with certain members are plausible. The worker is given leave to amend.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Du, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv249, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: Agriculture, antitrust, Commerce
J. Castel partially denies Google's motion to dismiss the advertisers' antitrust claims stemming from its monopoly of the digital advertising market. The complaint adequately alleges anticompetitive conduct related to ad exchanges and the ad-buying tools for small advertisers, but not for tools used by large advertisers. Further, the advertisers' claims directed to alleged misstatements about Google's implementation of reserve price optimization will be dismissed.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Castel, Filed On: March 1, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv5177, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Technology
J. Lipman mostly denies the cheerleading defendants' motion to exclude certain expert testimony in this antitrust class action involving the cheerleading industry, specifically regarding the prices paid to participate in "competitive cheerleading competitions and camps." The economic expert's opinions are mostly admissible, as the defendants have not shown that her methodology for defining relevant markets is unreliable. The motion is granted, however, as to "her opinions regarding Varsity's motives."
Court: USDC Western District of Tennessee , Judge: Lipman, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv2892, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Experts, Class Action
J. Reidinger denies a health care system’s motion to dismiss multiple municipalities’ allegations of monopolizing the inpatient acute and outpatient care markets in their areas. The system argues the municipalities fail to state a claim. However, evidence shows that the system has violated the Sherman Act by using so-called “all-or-nothing” requirements in its contracts with health insurers, systematically cornering the market in the municipalities.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Reidinger, Filed On: February 21, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv114, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Health Care, Trade
J. Wood largely grants a group of realtor associations’ motion to dismiss an antitrust class action brought by a class of home buyers. The home buyers accuse the realtor associations of conspiring with a brokerage firm to illegally affect price competition among real estate brokers, resulting in the home buyers paying illegally high commission rates for their retained brokers. The court, however, finds it lacks jurisdiction over one of the realtor associations, and rules the class representative has not sufficiently alleged Sherman Act violations. The class’s unjust enrichment claims stand.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Wood, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv430, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Jurisdiction, Class Action
J. Bell imposes a temporary restraining order on a hospital system until after a decision is made regarding the Federal Trade Commission’s motion for a preliminary injunction in this antitrust case. The court also outlines instructions regarding disagreements between the parties, including discovery, witnesses and evidence.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Bell, Filed On: February 12, 2024, Case #: 5:24cv28, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Health Care, Trade
J. Subramanian finds that the district court improperly dismissed class claims contending Mexican branches of multinational banks engaged in price-fixing on government bonds sold to U.S. retirement funds because while actual pricing occurred in Mexico, nonparty broker-dealers facilitated sales from New York.
Court: 2nd Circuit, Judge: Subramanian, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: 22-2039-cv, Categories: antitrust, Securities, Jurisdiction
[Consolidated]. J. Pitts declines to dismiss class antitrust claims against Energizer, who consumers are suing for making a deal with Walmart that allows the supermarket to set the retail prices for Energizer products where they are sold. There are three different classes suing, and they have shown evidence of this agreement between the companies and that it resulted in unfairly high prices.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Pitts, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv2093, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Class Action
J. Docherty denies the meat purchasers' joint motions for substitution of plaintiff in their case against the meat producers alleging a price-fixing scheme. Assigning the purchasers' claims to a company created by the entity financing the purchasers' litigation, apparently in an effort to bypass the purchasers while allowing the financier to pursue their claims as it sees fit, is "different from any other case to which the Court's attention has been directed by the parties," and the doctrine of antitrust standing weighs against the substitution.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Docherty, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: 0:18cv1776, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Jurisdiction
J. Gershon preserves in part antitrust claims that allege Gerber and Pelligro, two of the leading U.S. infant formula manufacturers, engaged in a scheme to block a pharmaceutical company from entering the store-brand infant formula market. The litigant sufficiently alleges an agreement that gave Pelligro right of first refusal to Gerber's excess capacity monopolized the market. The court, however, dismisses claims against Nestlé S.A. for lack of jurisdiction.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Gershon, Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv5382, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust
J. Axon grants partial summary judgment in favor of the poultry processors in this violation of Packers and Stockyards Act suit brought by a trustee of a bankruptcy estate and its farm. The trustee alleges the processors violated the Act by creating an anticompetitive market scheme to fix chicken prices higher than the market would otherwise support. The poultry processors claim the trustee and its farm are precluded due to the settlement agreement in a “Broiler Grower Litigation” class action. Therefore, judgment will be entered solely on the federal claim under the Act, and the court will decline to exercise jurisdiction for the state claims.
Court: USDC Northern District of Alabama , Judge: Axon, Filed On: February 2, 2024, Case #: 4:20cv1997, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: antitrust, Settlements
J. Rothstein denies Expedia's motion to dismiss the Swiss federal government office's complaint that Expedia offered low hotel booking rates on Trivago, an internet hotel booking “metasearch” engine, so that it could bankrupt Amoma, an online hotel booking company organized under Swiss law. The Swiss office manages to salvage its claim because it sufficiently alleges that Amoma could not move to another advertising platform because Trivago had to give Amoma accurate data that would allow the latter to successfully adapt to the new system.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Rothstein, Filed On: February 1, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv983, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust
J. Poissant finds that the trial court properly ruled in favor of the Harris County Bail Bond Board in a bail bonds business's suit challenging a rule that requires a criminal defendant to pay "ten percent of the face amount of bail" for the specified serious violent or sexual offenses. The business, which offers payment plans to clients, alleges it lost revenue when the rule went into effect. Based on Parker v. Brown, the board is entitled to state-action immunity as to antitrust concerns resulting from the adoption of the rule. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Poissant, Filed On: February 1, 2024, Case #: 14-22-00600-CV, Categories: antitrust, Government, Injunction
J. Jacobs finds that the district court properly dismissed claims in which public and union pension funds contend major participants in the multi-trillion-dollar market for U.S. Treasuries conspired to rig auctions for debt securities. Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate banks formed anticompetitive agreements since purportedly sharing proprietary information constituted "inconsequential market chatter," and evidence did not demonstrate a coherent scheme to threaten new secondary-market platforms for securities. Affirmed.
Court: 2nd Circuit, Judge: Jacobs, Filed On: February 1, 2024, Case #: 22-943, Categories: antitrust, Securities
J. Proctor denies the insurance company Blue Cross Blue Shield’s motion for partial summary judgment from this lawsuit related to several of BCBS’s “Blue Plans” in this antitrust litigation trademark dispute brought by a St. Paul, Minnesota, hospital. The Blue Plans used the hospital’s symbol, but not the mark, and BCBS argues it has common law trademark rights to the symbol. Questions of fact remain regarding the licenses to the marks in various markets.
Court: USDC Northern District of Alabama , Judge: Proctor, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 2:13cv20000, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: antitrust, Evidence, Trademark