In Allergan Inc. v. Photomedex Inc. et al., Central District of California Judge James V. Selna partly dismissed Athena Cosmetics Inc.’s allegations accusing rival Allergan Inc. of monopolizing the relevant market in ongoing litigation that arose from a patent related to eyelash enhancement products. The judge tossed Athena’s counterclaims of unfair competition and monopolization as they […]
Category Archives: market definition
Dole Not a Pineapple Monopoly
October 6, 2009 – 12:49 pm
In In Re: Pineapple Antitrust Litigation, Southern District of New York Judge Richard M. Berman handed Del Monte Fresh Produce Co. an emphatic victory against retailers and consumers that had accused the company of exploiting monopoly power in the market for extra sweet pineapple by using sham patent litigation since 1996 to gain a stranglehold and […]
House Sub-Committee Reports Bill to Overturn Leegin Leather
July 30, 2009 – 11:06 am
Update July 2009: The Courts and Competition Policy sub-committee of the House Judiciary Committee reported out a bill that would reverse Leegin and restore the per se rule. Although the current version had no exceptions, representatives generally supporting the measure also expressed support for limiting provisions that would permit Resale Price Maintenance in circumstances likely […]
9th Circuit Revives Web Domain Name Case
June 9, 2009 – 1:08 pm
A group calling itself the Coalition for ICANN Transparency, Inc. brought antitrust claims against Verisign, Inc., the sole entity licensed by ICANN to register .com and .net domain names. The district court dismissed the case, but the 9th Circuit reversed, holding that the complaint adequately stated antitrust claims. All parties agreed that as a practical […]
Whole Foods Merger: Market Definition & Marginal Consumers
June 1, 2009 – 2:50 pm
Update June 2009: The FTC has granted final approval to the proposed settlement. Update March 2009: The parties have reached a settlement allowing the merger to move forward with Whole Foods agreeing to divest the intellectual property in the Wild Oats brand, 13 stores, and the leases and assests of 19 closed stores. A divestiture […]
FTC Challenges Drug Acquisitions
January 4, 2009 – 3:27 pm
The FTC, along with the state of Minnesota, has sued Ovation Pharmaceuticals, arguing that the drug company acted anticompetitively in aquiring over the course of several months in 2005 and 2006 the only two drugs available in the US to treat a certain congenital heart defects. It acquired Indocin in August 2005, while a potentially competitive drug, […]
US Supreme Court Denies Cert, Upholding Decision that Tennis Tournament Restructuring Was Not Anticompetitive
December 2, 2008 – 1:14 am
Update December 2010: The U.S. Supreme Court declined to grant a writ of certiorari. Update June 2010: The Third Circuit has affirmed the juries decision in favor of the defendant on the ground that the plaintiffs failed to prove a relevant market. In a Delaware U.S. District Court case, the jury found for the defendant […]
Tying Claim Against Apple Dismissed
November 23, 2008 – 7:41 pm
An antitrust counterclaim alleging that Apple unlawfully tied the use of its operating system to the purchase of it own hardware was dismissed by a Northern District of California court on the ground that the plaintiff, Psystar, had failed to adequately allege the relevant market. Under Twombly, the court held, Psystar allegations were insufficient to […]
IPhone Antitrust Litigation to Proceed
October 9, 2008 – 4:55 pm
Judge James Ware, U.S. Dictrict Court for the District of California, denied Apple and AT&T’s motions to dismiss a putative class action alleging that Apple violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by monopolizing the market for aftermarket iphone applications. The complaint alleges that Apple notified iphone users that downloading third-party applications would void the phone’s […]
Physical Therapy Monopolization Case Survives Motion to Dismiss
September 11, 2008 – 3:23 pm
In National Athletic Trainers Association v. American Physical Therapy Association, a group of athletic trainers allege that the APTA has employed a number of anticompetitive practices to exclude athletic trainers from the market for manual therapy. The allegedly exclusionary practices include (1)disparaging athletic trainors by telling the publice and students studying to be physical therapists […]