In U.S. v. Hsu, Northern District of California Judge Richard Seeborg, denied a motion brought by defendants Eagle Eyes, E-Lite Automotive, Inc., and two top Eagle Eyes’ executives, to dismiss an indictment against them for conspiring to fix prices for replacement vehicle lights. According to the indictment, defendants participated in the conspiracy to set rates for aftermarket auto lights in the U.S. and elsewhere. In their motion to dismiss, the defendants maintained that the indictment should be dismissed because it didn’t sufficiently allege the defendants’ intent to participate in the long-running conspiracy. The court disagreed, and held that in United States v. Alston, the Ninth Circuit had previously refused to dismiss a Sherman Act indictment that also did not specifically contain the words “knowingly” or “intentionally” because the language of the Sherman Act implied criminal intent. Therefore, based on the Alston case, the conspiracy charges in the present case were held to be valid.