In Yates Construction Co. Inc. v. Sigma Corp. et al., New Jersey District Court Judge Anne E. Thompson dismissed, with leave to amend, a putative class action brought by indirect purchasers of ductile iron pipe fittings (DIPF) who accused McWane Inc. and other producers of fixing prices for the products.
The proposed class sued McWane, Star Pipe Products Ltd. and Sigma Corp. for participating in an illegal scheme to set the prices of all imported pipe fittings. The suit further alleges that McWane and Sigma conspired to eliminate competition by restricting the capacity of the pipe fittings produced in the U.S. through the enforcement of exclusive dealing policies.
In dismissing the suit, the court held that the indirect purchasers failed to show antitrust impact stemming from the purported anti-competitive conduct. The court found that while the class period in questioned is defined as January 2008 to the present, the offending conduct alleged in six of the plaintiffs’ 10 claims occurred in a space of time that’s shorter than that of the class period, so it is unclear whether any of the plaintiffs actually purchased DIPF during the time periods relevant to those claims. The court also found that several of the claims are directed to only one or two of the three defendants. This is problematic because the amended complaint doesn’t detail which defendant produced the pipe fittings bought by any individual plaintiff, so it’s unclear whether any putative class member actually purchased DIPF produced by any of the defendants charged under those claims.