In Stephenson Oil Co. et al. v. Citgo Petroleum Corp., Northern District of Oklahoma Judge Terence Kern has rejected a request by Citgo Petroleum Corp. to dismiss a putative class action brought by gasoline distributors alleging that the oil giant offered secret discounted rates to certain distributors. In their suit, Plaintiffs alleged that Citgo lured business its way by lowering wholesale prices to certain distributors, and concealing its price reduction to benefit from added sales volume without tipping competitors off to its lower prices. In its motion to dismiss Citgo relied on prior case law supporting companies’ right to charge different rates to different distributors in different markets, and claimed that plaintiffs were not overcharged, but rather that they paid the posted price, which was not unreasonable and fell within the UCC’s safe harbor provision. In denying Citgo’s motion, Judge Kern rejected both of those arguments, holding that 1) the cases cited by Citgo are distinguishable because the courts considered an evidentiary record, which generally included testimony from industry experts, in determining whether a pricing scheme was discriminatory; and 2) safe harbor rules are thrown out when a seller engaged in activities constituting an “abnormal” case such as price discrimination.