Update October 2010: Panasonic ($49.1 million) and Whirlpool (a subsidiary of Embraco North America) ($91.8 million) have agreed to pay criminal fines in the U.S. case. The investigation is on-going. Update March 2009: An appliance company has filed a putative class action on behalf of appliance sellers against Whirlpool, Tecumseh, and Panasonic, three compressor manufacturers that believed to […]
Author Archives: Steve Semeraro
EU and DOJ Investigating an Alledged Refrigeration Cartel+Class Action Filed
October 17, 2010 – 4:58 pm
School Supply/Calendar Bundled Discount Case to Move Forward
October 14, 2010 – 5:30 pm
Central District of CA Judge Dean Pregerson MeadWestvaco’s motion to dismiss in a case filed by Blue Sky The Color of Imagination, a competitor in the market for dated products such as calendars and datebooks. Blue Sky alleged that Mead holds about 90% of the market and that by offering bundled discounts to stores that […]
EC Closes I-Phone Investigation
October 14, 2010 – 1:55 pm
In response to Apple’s decisions to permit cross border warranty service and permitting applications developers more freedom in selecting programming tools, the EC closed its investigation of the company’s I-phone-related practices.
Sulfutic Acid Conspiracy Case to Move Forward
October 14, 2010 – 1:45 pm
Northern District of Ill Judge David Coar has refused to dismiss a claim that sulfuric acid manufacturers responded to shocks to the market with an agreement to reduce output and fix prices. The court did dismiss the case with respect to GAC on the ground that the complaint contained insufficient allegations that it was a […]
Auto Parts Price Discrimination Case Dismissed
October 14, 2010 – 12:12 pm
Southern District of NY Judge Richard Howell has dismissed, without prejudice, a price discrimination case alleging that major auto-parts manufacturers discriminated in favor of large retailers, Wal-mart and Autozone. The court dismissed the complaint on the ground that the allegations that the large retailers retail prices were lower than the wholesale price paid by the […]
ATM Price Fixing Case Dismissed
October 14, 2010 – 12:00 pm
Northern District of California Judge Charles Breyer has granted summary judgment to several banks charged with fixing the interchange fees on ATM transactions. The court held that the plaintiffs, bank customers, were indirect payers of the interchange fees, which are imposed directly on the banks. Although the customers likely bore the brunt of those fees […]
Gulf of Mexico Helicopter Services Case Dismissed
October 14, 2010 – 9:47 am
District of Delaware Judge Legrome Davis has dismissed a putative class action alleging that the three dominant helicopter services providers in the Gulf of Mexico had agreed to increase prices. The court held that the complaint failed to sufficiently allege that the helicopter companies entered an agreement.
Standing Question Certified for Review in Sanofi Case
October 14, 2010 – 9:38 am
District of NJ Judge Mary Cooper has issued an order certifying for interlocutory appeal her decision to deny defendant Sanofi’s motion to dismiss the claims against it on the ground that the plaintiff is a “mere distributor” and not a competitor. The court reasoned that there are substantial grounds for difference of opinion on the […]
ECJ Rules German Sports Gambling Monopolies Illegal
October 12, 2010 – 3:14 pm
The European Court of Justice has ruled that German State sports gambling monopolies are unjustifiable because they do not “consistently and systematically” confront risks involved in gambling. The monopolies were held to violate EU law because their advertising campaigns pursued maximum profits rather than the public interest reason for their monopoly status, combating crime or gambling addiction.
Tin Can Price Fixing Case Dismissed
October 12, 2010 – 1:50 pm
Judge Lawrence O’Neil, E.D. CA, dismissed a claim by a tomato canning company against US Steel and a Korean steel manufacturer alleging that the two conspired to monopolize the market for steel used to make tin cans and to monopolize the market. The defendant’s argued that the plaintiff’s price fixing claims for damages were barred […]