Update October 2010: The Supreme Court has denied certiorari, allowing the 3rd Circuit’s decision to stand.
In Feesers Inc. v. Michael Foods Inc. et al., Third Circuit ruled that Feesers Inc. and Sodexo Inc. were not competing purchasers under the federal law and therefore Feesers could not show that it suffered competitive injury under the Robinson-Patman Act. This ruling reversed an earlier win for Feesers in an antitrust case targeting Sodexo and egg and potato wholesaler Michael Foods Inc. According to the Third Circuit, Feesers sells food to self-operating institutions and food service management companies, whereas Sodexo sells food in conjunction with its food service management services, therefore, the two companies compete when a customer considers switching from self-op to food service management or vise versa, which occurs prior to Michael Foods’ sales of food products to the two companies. Thus, according to the Third Circuit, Feesers and Sodexo’s competition is irrelevant to the sales by Michael after that competition was complete.