Category Archives: US Federal Courts

Supreme Court Upholds Cost Based Access to Incumbant Phone Network

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the FCC interpretation of the 1996 Telecommunications Act requiring that incumbent local telephone networks provide access to competitors at cost.  AT&T had argued that cost-based access was no longer required and the Sixth Circuit agreed.  The high court, however, sided with the Federal Communications Commission, which argued that cost based […]

DOJ Proseuction of Blue Cross of Michigan to Move Forward

Update June 2011: Eastern District of Michigan Judge Denise Page Hood has denied a motion to dismiss the U.S. Department of Justice’s lawsuit against Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan.  The antitrust suit alleges that the most-favored-nation clauses in the health insurance company’s contracts with hospitals have effectively immunized Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan from competition […]

Bundled Discount on Blood Cell Growth Factor Products Dismissed

Update January 2011:  The Third Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding that the hospital was not a direct purchaser under Illinois Brick and therefore lacked standing under Section 4 of the Clayton Act.  This decision may be erroneous for at least two reasons.  First, the Illinois Brick rule prohibits indirect purchasers from recovering damages for […]

Class Certified in Case Alleging that It Delayed Generic Entrant

Update November 2010:  The court has certified a class of direct purchasers. Eastern District of Pennsylvania Judge Anita B. Brody rejected Glaxo-SmithKline’s (GSK) motion to dismiss a case alleging that it anticompetitively delayed the entry of generic Flonase into the market by filing citizens petitions before the FDA.  GSK argued that its conduct was protected […]

Hospital’s Campaign to Block New Entrant Protected by Noerr-Pennington Doctrine

The Seventh Circuit has affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Lake Forest Hospital in a Section 2 case filed by the Mercatus Group, which was attempting to open a competing health care facility.  Lake Forest adopted a multi-pronged campaign to (1) lobby the local council not to grant Mercatus the […]

Power Purchaser Lacks Standing

Update June 2011: The court denied the plaintiff’s motion to reconsider its decision. Southern District of NY Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled that Plaintiff, Charles Simon, lacked standing to sue electric power supplier KeySpan and Morgan Stanley for allegedly manipulating the price of power sold to Simon’s utility, Con Edison.   KeySpan paid $12 million to settle […]

Asparagus Seed Patent Challenge Needs to Allege Knowing Fraud to Support Antitrust Claims

District of New Jersey Judge Freda L. Wolfson dismissed antitrust claims filed by Jersey Asparagus Farms Inc. against Rutgers University concerning patents for asparagus seeds.  The plaintiff alleged that the patents were invalid on the ground that Rutgers failed to disclose prior art to the PTO.  Recognizing that fraudulently obtaining a patent may violate the antitrust […]

Welder Conspiracy Case to Move Forward

District of Washington Judge Lonny Suko refused to dismiss a conspiracy claim brought by ARC against AMH.  ARC alleges that AMH made false statements about ARC, emailing more than dozen of its customers and falsely telling reporting that ARC had gone out of business. The email also asked the customers to loan AMH one of ARC’s welders, and a few months later, AMH announced at […]

DOJ Sues to Block On-line Tax Preparation Software Merger

The Antitrust Division has sued to block H&R Block’s acquisition of TaxACT, an on-line software provider.  H&R and TaxACT are the number 2 and 3 providers of on-line tax prep software behind Intuit’s TurboTax.  The Division explained that it uncovered H&R Block documents indicating that the purpose of the merger was to eliminate a competitor […]

Monoplization Case Against Pfizer to Go Forward

Judge Faith Hochberg, District of New Jersey, denied Pfizer’s motion to dismiss claims alleging that it unlawfully sought to monopolize the market for gabapentin products.  Pharmacies purchasing the drugs argued that Pfizer violated the antitrust laws by, inter alia,  manipulating the patent approval process and filing sham law suits.  The court rejected Pfizer’s defenses that […]