http://www.lexisnexis.com/mealeys/news.aspx Headline Antitrust Legal News from LexisNexis® en-us http://www.lexisnexis.com/mealeys/images/lexismealeyslogo.gif 130 29 http://www.lexisnexis.com/mealeys/news.aspx Copyright 2012 http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%201%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank ATLANTA - Reverse payment settlements between the holder of a drug patent and generic manufacturers of the drug did not constitute an unfair restraint on trade in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 25 in affirming the dismissal of the Federal Trade Commission's antitrust lawsuit (Federal Trade Commission v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., No. 10-12729, 11th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8377). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%202%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - A federal judge in Pennsylvania on May 11 granted summary judgment to the producers and distributors of Wellbutrin XL on direct and indirect purchasers' claims that the defendants illegally conspired to prevent generic versions of the drug from entering the American market by filing sham patent infringement lawsuits and a citizen petition (In re: Wellbutrin XL Antitrust Litigation, Nos. 08-2431 [direct], 08-2431 [indirect], E.D. Pa.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66312; See April 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%203%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank RICHMOND, Va. - Purchasers of real estate brokerage services in South Carolina who brought two putative class actions against licensed real estate brokerages that served as board members of the local multiple listing services (MLSs) stated plausible claims that the defendants conspired to unfairly restrain market competition in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled May 14 in affirming the denial of the defendants' motions to dismiss (Albert Robertson, et al. v. Sea Pines Real Estate Companies, Incorporated, et al., Nos. 11-1538, 11-1540, 4th Cir.; Thomas Boland v. Consolidated Multiple Listings Service, Incorporated, et al., Nos. 11-1539, 11-1541, 4th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9694). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%204%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank CINCINNATI - The Local Government Antitrust Act of 1984 (LGAA) bars a day care center's antitrust claim against local government officials, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed April 27, concluding that county officials were acting within the scope of their official capacity while negotiating funding contracts (Wee Care Child Center, Inc., et al. v. Douglas E. Lumpkin, et al., No. 10-4160, 6th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8567). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%205%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - The federal judge in New York overseeing the electronic books antitrust multidistrict litigation on May 1stayed the actions against Hachette Book Group Inc. and Hachette Digital Inc. (collectively, Hachette) and HarperCollins Publishers, following the publishers' tentative settlement with 15 states and Puerto Rico (In re: Electronic Books Antitrust Litigation [All Actions], No. 11-md-02293, S.D. N.Y.; United States of America v. Apple Inc., et al., No. 12-md-02826, S.D. N.Y.; State of Texas, et al. v. Penguin Group [USA] Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-03394, S.D. N.Y.; See April 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%206%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - Electronic book purchasers may continue their class action lawsuit against Apple Inc. and several e-book publishers alleging that the defendants engaged in a conspiracy to fix prices of digital books in violation of federal and state antitrust laws, the federal judge in New York overseeing the multidistrict litigation ruled May 15 in denying the defendants' motion to dismiss (In re: Electronic Books Antitrust Litigation, Nos. 11 MD 2293, 11 Civ. 5576, 11 Civ. 5609, 11 Civ. 5621, 11 Civ. 5707, 11 Civ. 5750, 11 Civ. 5896, 11 Civ. 5898, 11 Civ. 5976, 11 Civ. 6019, 11 Civ. 6079, 11 Civ. 7507, 11 Civ. 7534, 11 Civ. 7323, 11 Civ. 8329, 11 Civ. 8608, 11 Civ. 9016, 11 Civ. 9014, 11 Civ. 9559, 11 Civ. 9560, 11 Civ. 9561, 11 Civ. 9562, 11 Civ. 9563, 11 Civ. 9564, 11 Civ. 9565, 11 Civ. 9566, 11 Civ. 9567, 12 Civ. 0476, S.D. N.Y.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68058). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%207%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - United Air Lines must defend allegations that it participated in a conspiracy to fix the price of air cargo shipments in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, a federal judge in New York ruled May 18, finding that the lawsuit was not time-barred, that a plausible claim was asserted and that the claim was not necessarily discharged in United's bankruptcy (DPWN Holdings [USA], Inc. v. United Air Lines, Inc., et al., No. 11-CV-564, E.D. N.Y.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70026). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%208%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - Indirect purchasers' Sherman Act conspiracy claims against several egg producers were dismissed without prejudice because the purchasers' allegations did not directly connect the producers to a price-fixing conspiracy, but federal conspiracy claims against other producers and state antitrust, consumer protection and unjust enrichment claims can continue, the federal judge in Pennsylvania who is overseeing the multidistrict litigation ruled April 24 (In re: Processed Egg Products Antitrust Litigation [All Indirect Purchaser Plaintiff Actions], MDL No. 2002, No. 08-md-02002, E.D. Pa.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57846; See March 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%209%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - A putative class of former college athletes who are accusing video game manufacturer Electronic Arts Inc. (EA) of conspiring with the National Collegiate Athletic Association and the Collegiate Licensing Co. (CLC) to use the former athletes names and likenesses in products without compensation in violation of the Sherman Act sufficiently allege a "meeting of the minds," the federal judge in California overseeing the multidistrict litigation ruled May 16 in denying EA's motion for judgment on the pleadings (In re NCAA Student-Athlete Name & Likeness Licensing Litigation, No. C 09-1967, N.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68712). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2010%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - Four baseball fans filed a putative class action in federal court in New York on May 9 against Major League Baseball Enterprises Inc. (MLB), several MLB member clubs and several cable and Internet providers, alleging that live-game video offerings violate antitrust laws (Fernanda Garber, et al. v. Office of the Commissioner of Baseball, et al., No. 12-cv-3704, S.D. N.Y.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2011%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - Direct and indirect purchasers on May 21 filed for preliminary approval of a $10.5 million settlement with Aland (Jiangsu) Nutraceutical Co. Ltd., a Chinese manufacturer of Vitamin C, on claims that the manufacturer participated in an illegal cartel with other Chinese corporations to fix prices and limit supply for exports of Vitamin C, including those to the United States (In re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation [All Cases], No. 06-MC-1738, E.D. N.Y.; See January 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2012%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - A federal judge in New York on April 30 granted final approval to a $49.5 million class action settlement with American Express on claims that American Express violated antitrust laws by conspiring with credit-card-issuing banks to fix foreign currency conversion fees; however, claims that it conspired to impose arbitration clauses in cardholder agreements continue (In re Currency Conversion Fee Antitrust Litigation [Robert Ross, et al. v. American Express Company, et al.], MDL No. 1409, 04 Civ. 5723, S.D. N.Y.; See November 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2013%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on May 21 denied a petition for rehearing of its denial of a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by indirect purchasers of diamonds that sought review of a divided en banc Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals' ruling reinstating a $295 million settlement of a class action lawsuit that alleged that De Beers companies fixed prices in the wholesale market for gem-quality diamonds (David T. Murray, et al. v. Shawn Sullivan, et al., No. 11-1111, U.S. Sup.; See April 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2014%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN JOSE - In a patent case related to mobile device technology, a federal judge in California on May14 denied Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.'s motion to dismiss several of Apple Inc.'s amended counterclaims, including a claim alleging that Samsung made misrepresentations to standards-setting organizations (SSOs) in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, but the judge granted Samsung's motion to dismiss Apple's counterclaim for promissory estoppel, breach of contract and declaratory judgment (Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., et al., No. 11-1846, N.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67102; See October 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2015%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge in California on May 21 dismissed with prejudice an antitrust action brought by indirect purchasers challenging an alleged patent-licensing arrangement to control the availability and pricing of secure digital memory card (SD card) technologies as an unlawful restraint of trade (Dr. Dan Oliver, et al. V. SD-3C, LLC, et al., No. C 11-01260, N.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70615). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2016%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank BOSTON - A consumer's allegations that U-Haul International Inc. violated Massachusetts baby Federal Trade Commission Act by inviting its competitors to match prices and by increasing its prices incident to those invitations made the claim plausible, the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled May 4 in vacating the trial court's dismissal for failure to state a claim (Marcia Mei-Lee Liu v. Amerco, et al., No. 11-2053, 1st Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9172). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2017%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PITTSBURGH - A federal judge in Pennsylvania on April 25 ruled that pharmacies and pharmacy trade groups challenging the consummated $29 billion merger of pharmaceutical benefit management companies Express Scripts Inc. (ESI) and Medco Health Solutions Inc. were not entitled to a preliminary injunction because they failed to establish the likelihood of immediate, irreparable harm that could be alleviated by the issuance of a preliminary injunction (National Association of Chain Drug Stores, et al. v. Express Scripts, Inc., et al., No. 2:12-cv-00395-CB, W.D. Pa.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57884). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2018%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank TOPEKA, Kan. - The Kansas Supreme Court ruled May 4 that a state trial court improperly analyzed class action claims involving retail price maintenance agreements under the Kansas Restraint of Trade Act (KRTA) using the federal rule-of-reason approach because the Kansas statute does not mention reasonableness or a rule of reason (Sue O'Brien, et al. v. Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc., No. 101,000, Kan. Sup.; 2012 Kan. LEXIS 246). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2019%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - New York state law does not prohibit as a matter of law resale price maintenance (RPM) agreements, a state appeals court ruled May 8 in affirming the dismissal of an action brought by the New York State Office of the Attorney General (OAG) against Tempur-Pedic International Inc. (People of the State of New York, etc. v. Tempur-Pedic International, Inc., No. 7572, 400837/10, N.Y. Sup., App. Div., 1st Dept.; 2012 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3528). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2020%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 4 refused to reconsider its opinion dismissing cable and satellite television subscribers' allegations that television programmers and distributors violated federal antitrust law by bundling channels because the subscribers failed to sufficiently allege injury to competition, as opposed to injury to consumers (Rob Brantley, et al. v. NBC Universal, Inc., et al., No. 09-56785, 9th Cir.; See April 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2021%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 27 denied a petition for permission to appeal a district court's order decertifying a class of iPhone purchasers in their antitrust claims against Apple Inc. and AT&T Mobility Inc. (ATTM) and granting motions to compel arbitration filed by Apple and AT&T (Paul Holman, et al. v. Apple, Inc., et al., No. 12-80012, 9th Cir.; See February 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2022%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - The Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 11 in an unpublished opinion instructed a federal trial court to determine whether a corporate by-law that creates an obligation to pay attorney fees to the corporation if it is the prevailing defendant in an antitrust lawsuit is valid under Delaware law (Deutscher Tennis Bund, et al. v. ATP Tour Inc., et al., No. 09-4361, 3rd Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9591; See July 2010). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%201%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank ATLANTA - Reverse payment settlements between the holder of a drug patent and generic manufacturers of the drug did not constitute an unfair restraint on trade in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 25 in affirming the dismissal of the Federal Trade Commission's antitrust lawsuit (Federal Trade Commission v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., No. 10-12729, 11th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8377). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%202%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - A federal judge in Pennsylvania on May 11 granted summary judgment to the producers and distributors of Wellbutrin XL on direct and indirect purchasers' claims that the defendants illegally conspired to prevent generic versions of the drug from entering the American market by filing sham patent infringement lawsuits and a citizen petition (In re: Wellbutrin XL Antitrust Litigation, Nos. 08-2431 [direct], 08-2431 [indirect], E.D. Pa.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66312; See April 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%203%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank RICHMOND, Va. - Purchasers of real estate brokerage services in South Carolina who brought two putative class actions against licensed real estate brokerages that served as board members of the local multiple listing services (MLSs) stated plausible claims that the defendants conspired to unfairly restrain market competition in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled May 14 in affirming the denial of the defendants' motions to dismiss (Albert Robertson, et al. v. Sea Pines Real Estate Companies, Incorporated, et al., Nos. 11-1538, 11-1540, 4th Cir.; Thomas Boland v. Consolidated Multiple Listings Service, Incorporated, et al., Nos. 11-1539, 11-1541, 4th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9694). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%204%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank CINCINNATI - The Local Government Antitrust Act of 1984 (LGAA) bars a day care center's antitrust claim against local government officials, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed April 27, concluding that county officials were acting within the scope of their official capacity while negotiating funding contracts (Wee Care Child Center, Inc., et al. v. Douglas E. Lumpkin, et al., No. 10-4160, 6th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8567). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%205%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - The federal judge in New York overseeing the electronic books antitrust multidistrict litigation on May 1stayed the actions against Hachette Book Group Inc. and Hachette Digital Inc. (collectively, Hachette) and HarperCollins Publishers, following the publishers' tentative settlement with 15 states and Puerto Rico (In re: Electronic Books Antitrust Litigation [All Actions], No. 11-md-02293, S.D. N.Y.; United States of America v. Apple Inc., et al., No. 12-md-02826, S.D. N.Y.; State of Texas, et al. v. Penguin Group [USA] Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-03394, S.D. N.Y.; See April 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%206%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - Electronic book purchasers may continue their class action lawsuit against Apple Inc. and several e-book publishers alleging that the defendants engaged in a conspiracy to fix prices of digital books in violation of federal and state antitrust laws, the federal judge in New York overseeing the multidistrict litigation ruled May 15 in denying the defendants' motion to dismiss (In re: Electronic Books Antitrust Litigation, Nos. 11 MD 2293, 11 Civ. 5576, 11 Civ. 5609, 11 Civ. 5621, 11 Civ. 5707, 11 Civ. 5750, 11 Civ. 5896, 11 Civ. 5898, 11 Civ. 5976, 11 Civ. 6019, 11 Civ. 6079, 11 Civ. 7507, 11 Civ. 7534, 11 Civ. 7323, 11 Civ. 8329, 11 Civ. 8608, 11 Civ. 9016, 11 Civ. 9014, 11 Civ. 9559, 11 Civ. 9560, 11 Civ. 9561, 11 Civ. 9562, 11 Civ. 9563, 11 Civ. 9564, 11 Civ. 9565, 11 Civ. 9566, 11 Civ. 9567, 12 Civ. 0476, S.D. N.Y.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68058). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%207%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - United Air Lines must defend allegations that it participated in a conspiracy to fix the price of air cargo shipments in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, a federal judge in New York ruled May 18, finding that the lawsuit was not time-barred, that a plausible claim was asserted and that the claim was not necessarily discharged in United's bankruptcy (DPWN Holdings [USA], Inc. v. United Air Lines, Inc., et al., No. 11-CV-564, E.D. N.Y.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70026). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%208%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - Indirect purchasers' Sherman Act conspiracy claims against several egg producers were dismissed without prejudice because the purchasers' allegations did not directly connect the producers to a price-fixing conspiracy, but federal conspiracy claims against other producers and state antitrust, consumer protection and unjust enrichment claims can continue, the federal judge in Pennsylvania who is overseeing the multidistrict litigation ruled April 24 (In re: Processed Egg Products Antitrust Litigation [All Indirect Purchaser Plaintiff Actions], MDL No. 2002, No. 08-md-02002, E.D. Pa.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57846; See March 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%209%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - A putative class of former college athletes who are accusing video game manufacturer Electronic Arts Inc. (EA) of conspiring with the National Collegiate Athletic Association and the Collegiate Licensing Co. (CLC) to use the former athletes names and likenesses in products without compensation in violation of the Sherman Act sufficiently allege a "meeting of the minds," the federal judge in California overseeing the multidistrict litigation ruled May 16 in denying EA's motion for judgment on the pleadings (In re NCAA Student-Athlete Name & Likeness Licensing Litigation, No. C 09-1967, N.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68712). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2010%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - Four baseball fans filed a putative class action in federal court in New York on May 9 against Major League Baseball Enterprises Inc. (MLB), several MLB member clubs and several cable and Internet providers, alleging that live-game video offerings violate antitrust laws (Fernanda Garber, et al. v. Office of the Commissioner of Baseball, et al., No. 12-cv-3704, S.D. N.Y.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2011%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - Direct and indirect purchasers on May 21 filed for preliminary approval of a $10.5 million settlement with Aland (Jiangsu) Nutraceutical Co. Ltd., a Chinese manufacturer of Vitamin C, on claims that the manufacturer participated in an illegal cartel with other Chinese corporations to fix prices and limit supply for exports of Vitamin C, including those to the United States (In re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation [All Cases], No. 06-MC-1738, E.D. N.Y.; See January 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2012%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - A federal judge in New York on April 30 granted final approval to a $49.5 million class action settlement with American Express on claims that American Express violated antitrust laws by conspiring with credit-card-issuing banks to fix foreign currency conversion fees; however, claims that it conspired to impose arbitration clauses in cardholder agreements continue (In re Currency Conversion Fee Antitrust Litigation [Robert Ross, et al. v. American Express Company, et al.], MDL No. 1409, 04 Civ. 5723, S.D. N.Y.; See November 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2013%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on May 21 denied a petition for rehearing of its denial of a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by indirect purchasers of diamonds that sought review of a divided en banc Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals' ruling reinstating a $295 million settlement of a class action lawsuit that alleged that De Beers companies fixed prices in the wholesale market for gem-quality diamonds (David T. Murray, et al. v. Shawn Sullivan, et al., No. 11-1111, U.S. Sup.; See April 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2014%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN JOSE - In a patent case related to mobile device technology, a federal judge in California on May14 denied Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.'s motion to dismiss several of Apple Inc.'s amended counterclaims, including a claim alleging that Samsung made misrepresentations to standards-setting organizations (SSOs) in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, but the judge granted Samsung's motion to dismiss Apple's counterclaim for promissory estoppel, breach of contract and declaratory judgment (Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., et al., No. 11-1846, N.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67102; See October 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2015%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge in California on May 21 dismissed with prejudice an antitrust action brought by indirect purchasers challenging an alleged patent-licensing arrangement to control the availability and pricing of secure digital memory card (SD card) technologies as an unlawful restraint of trade (Dr. Dan Oliver, et al. V. SD-3C, LLC, et al., No. C 11-01260, N.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70615). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2016%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank BOSTON - A consumer's allegations that U-Haul International Inc. violated Massachusetts baby Federal Trade Commission Act by inviting its competitors to match prices and by increasing its prices incident to those invitations made the claim plausible, the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled May 4 in vacating the trial court's dismissal for failure to state a claim (Marcia Mei-Lee Liu v. Amerco, et al., No. 11-2053, 1st Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9172). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2017%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PITTSBURGH - A federal judge in Pennsylvania on April 25 ruled that pharmacies and pharmacy trade groups challenging the consummated $29 billion merger of pharmaceutical benefit management companies Express Scripts Inc. (ESI) and Medco Health Solutions Inc. were not entitled to a preliminary injunction because they failed to establish the likelihood of immediate, irreparable harm that could be alleviated by the issuance of a preliminary injunction (National Association of Chain Drug Stores, et al. v. Express Scripts, Inc., et al., No. 2:12-cv-00395-CB, W.D. Pa.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57884). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2018%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank TOPEKA, Kan. - The Kansas Supreme Court ruled May 4 that a state trial court improperly analyzed class action claims involving retail price maintenance agreements under the Kansas Restraint of Trade Act (KRTA) using the federal rule-of-reason approach because the Kansas statute does not mention reasonableness or a rule of reason (Sue O'Brien, et al. v. Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc., No. 101,000, Kan. Sup.; 2012 Kan. LEXIS 246). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2019%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - New York state law does not prohibit as a matter of law resale price maintenance (RPM) agreements, a state appeals court ruled May 8 in affirming the dismissal of an action brought by the New York State Office of the Attorney General (OAG) against Tempur-Pedic International Inc. (People of the State of New York, etc. v. Tempur-Pedic International, Inc., No. 7572, 400837/10, N.Y. Sup., App. Div., 1st Dept.; 2012 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3528). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2020%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 4 refused to reconsider its opinion dismissing cable and satellite television subscribers' allegations that television programmers and distributors violated federal antitrust law by bundling channels because the subscribers failed to sufficiently allege injury to competition, as opposed to injury to consumers (Rob Brantley, et al. v. NBC Universal, Inc., et al., No. 09-56785, 9th Cir.; See April 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2021%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 27 denied a petition for permission to appeal a district court's order decertifying a class of iPhone purchasers in their antitrust claims against Apple Inc. and AT&T Mobility Inc. (ATTM) and granting motions to compel arbitration filed by Apple and AT&T (Paul Holman, et al. v. Apple, Inc., et al., No. 12-80012, 9th Cir.; See February 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-2%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2022%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - The Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 11 in an unpublished opinion instructed a federal trial court to determine whether a corporate by-law that creates an obligation to pay attorney fees to the corporation if it is the prevailing defendant in an antitrust lawsuit is valid under Delaware law (Deutscher Tennis Bund, et al. v. ATP Tour Inc., et al., No. 09-4361, 3rd Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9591; See July 2010). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%201%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - The U.S Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, sued Apple Inc. and five book publishers in federal court in New York on April 11, alleging that Apple and the publishers engaged in a conspiracy to fix prices of digital books in violation of federal antitrust laws; three of the publishers agreed to settle the lawsuit (United States of America v. Apple, Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-02826-UA, S.D. N.Y.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%202%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - A proposed amended complaint (PAC) of a bankrupt wholesaler of national magazines that accused magazine publishers, distributors and another wholesaler of conspiring to put it out of business satisfied the plausibility standards of Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 3, concluding that the trial court erred in granting the defendants' motion to dismiss and denying the plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint (Anderson News, L.L.C., et al. v. American Media, Inc., et al., No. 10-4591-cv, 2nd Cir.; See August 2010). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%203%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank ALBANY, NY - The New York Court of Appeals on March 27 ruled that Global Reinsurance Corp. failed to sufficiently allege that Equitas Ltd. engaged in a conspiracy in the worldwide market for retrocessional coverage in violation of the Donnelly Act, New York's antitrust law, because Global did not allege that Equitas had the power to inflict market-wide anticompetitive injury (Global Reinsurance Corporation - U.S. Branch v. Equitas Ltd., et al., No. 53, N.Y. App.; 2012 N.Y. LEXIS 550; See January 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%204%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN JOSE, Calif. - Employees of seven high-tech companies with principal places of business in the San Francisco-Silicon Valley may continue with their allegations that the defendants, including Apple Inc., conspired to fix and suppress employee compensation and to restrict employee mobility by entering into identical bilateral "Do Not Cold Call" agreements, a federal judge in California ruled April 18 (In re: High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation, No. 11-CV-02509-LHK, N.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55302). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%205%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank GREENEVILLE, Tenn. - The federal judge in Tennessee overseeing the multidistrict litigation involving alleged anti-competitive actions of defendant milk marketers and sellers on March 27 dismissed a putative class action brought by direct purchasers, finding that the purchasers failed to allege antitrust injury and a relevant geographic market (In re: Southeastern Milk Antitrust Litigation, Master File No. 2:08-MD-1000, E.D. Tenn. [Food Lion, LLC, et al. v. Dean Foods Company, et al., No. 2:07-CV-188, E.D. Tenn.]; See December 2010). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%206%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank DETROIT - A Michigan federal judge on March 30 dismissed a health insurance company from a class action lawsuit that accused the insurer and 21 hospital and health systems of illegally contracting, conspiring and engaging in anticompetitive conduct through the execution of "most favored nation" (MFN) clauses in contracts between the parties (City of Pontiac v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, et al., No. 11-10276, E.D. Mich.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45088). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%207%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - Direct and indirect purchasers may continue with their claims alleging a wide-ranging conspiracy to fix the prices of optical disk drives (ODDs) by manufacturers and sellers of ODDs, a federal judge in California ruled April 19 in denying the defendant's motions to dismiss the purchasers' amended complaints (In re Optical Disk Drive Antitrust Litigation, No. 3:10-md-2143 RS, N.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55300). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%208%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SANTA BARBARA, Calif. - A California jury on April 6 rejected an orthopedic surgeon's claims that a hospital, the hospital's trauma director and four of the hospital's on-call neurosurgeons conspired to keep him from joining the hospital's on-call panel in violation of California's antitrust law (Alan Moelleken, M.D., et al. v. Cottage Health System, et al., No. 1339785, Calif. Super., Santa Barbara Co.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%209%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank ATLANTA - The 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 16 agreed to rehear en banc its ruling that hedge funds that purchased promissory notes from CompuCredit Holdings Corp. did not violate federal antitrust law by making a collective demand on CompuCredit to pay above-market prices to redeem its notes early (CompuCredit Holdings Corporation v. Akanthos Capital Management, LLC, et al., No. 11-13254, 11th Cir.; See November 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2010%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on April 2 denied a petition filed by indirect purchasers of diamonds seeking review of a divided en banc Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals' ruling reinstating a $295 million settlement of a class action lawsuit that alleged that De Beers companies fixed prices in the wholesale market for gem-quality diamonds (David T. Murray, et al. v. Shawn Sullivan, et al., No. 11-1111, U.S. Sup.; See March 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2011%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on April 2 denied review of a Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that a bankruptcy trustee failed to sufficiently allege that lenders violated the Sherman Act by conspiring to determine the terms on which they would provide financing to a garment retailer (Jeoffrey L. Burtch v. Milberg Factors, Inc., et al., No. 11-932, U.S. Sup.; See March 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2012%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEWARK, N.J. - A federal multidistrict litigation judge in New Jersey approved a $41 million settlement agreement on March 30 between settling plaintiffs and defendants regarding allegations of a bid-rigging conspiracy between insurance companies and insurance brokerage firms (In re: Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 1663, Signum LLC v. AON Corp. and AON Risk Services of the Carolinas Inc., No. 05-4047, D. N.J.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44861; See June 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2013%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank BIRMINGHAM, Ala. - An Alabama man and his employer filed a class action lawsuit on April 17 in federal court against Blue Cross companies, alleging antitrust violations for allegedly conspiring to divide and allocate markets for commercial, consumer health insurance in the state (Fred R. Richards, et al. v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama, et al., No. 12-1133, N.D. Ala.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2014%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - Cable and satellite television subscribers' allegations that television programmers and distributors violated federal antitrust law by bundling channels failed to sufficiently allege injury to competition, as opposed to injury to consumers, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled March 30 in affirming the dismissal of the subscribers' claims (Rob Brantley, et al. v. NBC Universal, Inc., et al., No. 09-56785, 9th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 6441; See November 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2015%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - Approximately 2 million nonbasic cable television customers in the Philadelphia market may proceed to trial against Comcast on the class's Sherman Act Section 1 rule-of-reason claim and certain of its Section 2 monopolization and attempted monopolization claims related to the company's swap agreements, a federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled April 12 (Caroline Behrend, et al. v. Comcast Corporation, et al., No. 03-6604, E.D. Pa.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51889). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2016%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank OAKLAND, Calif. - PNY Technologies Inc. failed to sufficiently allege that SanDisk Corp. misused the market power inherent in its patent portfolio in the flash memory technology upstream market to demand multitiered licensing and royalties in the downstream markets, a federal judge in California ruled April 20 in dismissing PNY's antitrust complaint (PNY Technologies, Inc. v. SanDisk Corporation, No. C-11-04689, N.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55965). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2017%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PADUCAH, Ky. - A federal judge in Kentucky on March 26 granted in part a student loan lender's motion to dismiss a suit in which the plaintiffs say the dean of a defunct law school and the lender enriched themselves by making the lender the exclusive source for student loans at the school (Brown, et al. v. Student Loan X-Press, et al., No. 11-00090, W.D. Ky.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40878). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2018%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - Purchasers of Cipro on March 27 filed their opening brief urging the California Supreme Court to review the Court of Appeal's ruling that pay-for-delay settlement agreements between the manufacturer of a branded antibiotic and its generic competitors do not violate California antitrust laws (In re Cipro Cases I & II, No. S198616, Calif. Sup.; See February 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2019%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - A federal district court judge properly granted summary judgment to a hospital, its director of radiology and two radiologist physician groups on a radiologist's claims that an exclusive contract between the hospital and a physician group violated state and federal antitrust laws, the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed April 17 in an unpublished opinion (George G. Bocobo, M.D., v. Radiology Consultants of South Jersey, P.A., et al., No. 07-3142, 3rd Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7642). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2020%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - The Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on March 28 granted West Penn Allegheny Health System Inc.'s motion for disqualification of the judge in the hospital's antitrust action against the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Inc. (UPMC) (In re: West Penn Allegheny Health System, Inc., No. 12-1550, 3rd Cir.; See February 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2021%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank LOS ANGELES - A federal judge in California hearing class actions alleging monopolization by a nationwide concert promoter on March 23 granted the defense summary judgment in two cases previously certified, after fully examining expert testimony as is now suggested by the recent U.S. Supreme Court holding in Dukes v. Walmart (In Re Live Concert Antitrust Litigation [Lauren J. Hammer v. Clear Channel Communications Inc., et al. and Margaret A. Thompson v. Clear Channel Communications, et al.], No. 06-ML-1745-SVW [VBK], C.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47768). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2022%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - A class of approximately 2 million non-basic cable television customers in the Philadelphia market on April 9 filed a brief in opposition to Comcast's petition seeking U.S. Supreme Court review, in light of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes (131 S.Ct. 2541 [2011]), of a Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling affirming the certification of the class on its claims that Comcast Corp. worked to establish a monopoly in the Philadelphia market and then increased prices once it had eliminated competition (Comcast Corporation, et al. v. Caroline Behrend, et al., No. 11-864, U.S. Sup.; See January 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=7-1%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2023%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - A federal judge in Pennsylvania on April 9 refused to reconsider her order granting certification of a class of indirect purchasers who are suing the producers and distributors of Wellbutrin XL for illegally conspiring to prevent generic versions of the drug from entering the American market (In re: Wellbutrin XL Antitrust Litigation, No. 08-2431 [indirect], E.D. Pa.; See August 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%201%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank CINCINNATI - The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Feb. 22 affirmed the dismissal of antitrust and constitutional challenges brought by General Tobacco to the national tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) between tobacco manufacturers and numerous states (VIBO Corp., Inc., d/b/a General Tobacco v. Jack Conway, in his official capacity as Attorney General, Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al., No. 10-5043, 6th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 3475; See September 2010). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%202%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Federal Trade Commission on March 23 filed a petition for a writ of certiorari seeking review of an 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that although a merger between two Georgia hospitals would substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly, the state-action doctrine immunized the conduct from a challenge by the FTC (Federal Trade Commission v. Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc., et al., No. 11-1160, U.S. Sup.; See December 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%203%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW HAVEN - Several construction unions and employers may continue with their claims that a carpenter union's signatory subcontracting clause in its collective bargaining agreements violates antitrust laws, a federal judge in Connecticut ruled March 20, concluding that the agreements may not be "true" collective bargaining agreements subject to the antitrust labor exemption (Connecticut Ironworkers Employers Assoc., et al. v. New England Regional Council of Carpenters, No. 3:10cv165, D. Conn.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37523). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%204%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank CINCINNATI - A refrigeration equipment manufacturer sufficiently pleaded that producers of copper tubing engaged in a conspiracy to fix prices of the copper tubing in the United States in violation of the Sherman Act, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled March 2, reversing a trial court's dismissal of the complaint (Carrier Corporation, et al. v. Outokumpu Oyj, et al., Nos. 07-6052, 07-6114, 6th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 4283). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%205%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank DETROIT - Registered nurses (RNs) failed to produce evidence of an agreement among eight Detroit-area hospitals to fix the compensation of RNs sufficient to defeat the hospitals' motions for summary judgment on the RNs' conspiracy claims, but the RNs did produce sufficient evidence to establish anti-competitive effects resulting from the exchange of compensation-related information among the hospitals in violation of federal antitrust law, a federal judge in Michigan ruled March 22 (Pat Cason-Merenda, et al. v. Detroit Medical Center, et al., No. 06-15601, E.D. Mich.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38810). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%206%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on March 30 will consider whether to review a Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that a bankruptcy trustee failed to sufficiently allege that lenders violated the Sherman Act by conspiring to determine the terms on which they would provide financing to a garment retailer (Jeoffrey L. Burtch v. Milberg Factors, Inc., et al., No. 11-932, U.S. Sup.; See October 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%207%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - Indirect purchasers of diamonds on March 8 petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review a divided en banc Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals' ruling reinstating a $295 million settlement of a class action lawsuit that alleged that De Beers companies fixed prices in the wholesale market for gem-quality diamonds (David T. Murray, et al. v. Shawn Sullivan, et al., No. 11-1111, Sup. Ct.; See December 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%208%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - The federal judge in California overseeing the film transistor-liquid crystal display (TFT-LCD) antitrust class action litigation on March 21 denied the indirect purchasers' request for a trial separate from the direct purchasers' trial on their claims that the manufacturers conspired to raise and fix the price of TFT-LCD panels and certain products containing those panels for more than 10 years, resulting in overcharges to purchasers (In re: TFT-LCD [Flat Panel] Antitrust Litigation [All Direct Purchaser Actions], MDL No. 3:07-md-1827 SI, N.D. Calif.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%209%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - The Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on March 20 in an unpublished opinion ruled that, despite objections, the federal trial court properly approved an antitrust settlement between Cadbury and a subclass of indirect end-user (IEU) purchasers on allegations that chocolate manufacturers conspired to fix for chocolate candy in the United States (In re: Chocolate Confectionary Antitrust Litigation, Clyde F. Padgett, Appellant, No. 12-1151, 3rd Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 5755). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2010%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank DENVER - Denver nightclubs may continue with their unlawful tying and monopolization claims that a digital download service, a competitor nightclub and the owner of those two businesses coerced disc jockeys to perform at the competitor nightclub, a federal judge in Colorado ruled March 14 (Regas Christou, et al. v. Beatport, LLC, et al., No. 10-cv-02912, D. Colo.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34307). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2011%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SALT LAKE CITY - Novell Inc. on March 9 opposed Microsoft Corp.'s renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law in Novell's antitrust case alleging that Microsoft unlawfully used its dominant position in the personal computer (PC) operating systems market to monopolize other software markets, including word-processing and other office productivity applications (Novell, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 2:04-cv-01045, D. Utah; See February 2012). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2012%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank ATLANTA - Hedge funds are not entitled to sanctions in a case in which the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a district court's ruling that they did not violate federal antitrust law by making a collective demand to force the issuer of promissory notes to pay above-market prices to redeem its notes early, a federal judge in Georgia ruled Feb. 24 (CompuCredit Holdings Corporation v. Akanthos Capital Management, LLC, et al., No. 1:11-cv-117, N.D. Ga.; See November 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2013%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN DIEGO - A developer and publisher of social media applications on March 19 sued Facebook Inc., alleging that Facebook violated federal and state antitrust laws by causing advertisers to boycott the developer's app and seeking damages and injunctive relief (Sambreel Holdings LLC, et al. v. Facebook, Inc., No. 12cv0668, S.D. Calif.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2014%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - A losing antitrust plaintiff was properly taxed with only those charges imposed by the prevailing defendants' electronic discovery vendors for scanning and file format conversion, the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled March 16 (Race Tires America, Inc., et al. v. Hoosier Racing Tire Corp., et al., No. 11-2316, 3rd Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 5511; See May 2011). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2015%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - Indirect purchasers have standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution to sue producers of eggs for price fixing under the antitrust laws of Iowa, Mississippi, North Dakota and South Dakota even though the indirect purchasers did not reside in or buy eggs in those states, the federal judge in Pennsylvania who is overseeing the multidistrict litigation ruled March 20 (In re: Processed Egg Products Antitrust Litigation [All Indirect Purchaser Plaintiff Actions], MDL No. 2002, No. 08-md-02002, E.D. Pa.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37265). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2016%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank LOS ANGELES - Producers and owners of multimedia content cannot demonstrate antitrust injury in their lawsuit against wireless carriers because they are not participants in the same market, a federal judge in California ruled March 1 in dismissing the complaint with prejudice (Bruce "Max" Davis, et al. v. AT&T Wireless Services Inc., et al., No. 11-02674, C.D. Calif.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=6-12%20LexisNexis%20Antitrust%20Rep.%2017%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on March 19 denied Chinese companies' petitions for review of a Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act of 1982 (FTAIA), which provides that the Sherman Act does not apply to conduct involving trade or commerce with foreign nations, "imposes a substantive merits limitation rather than a jurisdictional bar" (China Minmetals Corporation, et al. v. Animal Science Products, Inc., et al., No. 11-846, U.S. Sup.; Sinosteel Corporation, et al. v. Animal Science Products, Inc., et al., No. 11-847, U.S. Sup.; See January 2012).