In In re: Ethylene Propylene, District of Connecticut Judge Stefan R. Underhill refused to dismiss antitrust allegations against two subsidiaries of multinational manufacturing company Royal DSM NV, alleging that the defendants fixed the price of ethylene propylene diene monomer synthetic rubber used in the auto and roofing industries. The Court rejected the defendants’ contentions that the class of direct purchasers relied on hearsay rather than fact when implicating the DSM units, and held that “the plaintiffs have presented enough evidence of meetings and discussions about the price increase for EPDM and capacity issues in the North American market between supposed competitors that a reasonable fact-finder could conclude that the defendants were engaged in illegally collusive behavior, and that the DSM defendants were active participants in that conspiracy.”