Search for: "Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs"
Results 61 - 80
of 501
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Jun 2014, 8:08 am
The problem with this method was that Plaintiffs, as indirect purchasers, were not bringing a federal anti-trust claim. [read post]
14 Dec 2014, 1:52 pm
Whether a claim involves direct or indirect harm (i.e., whether consumers have allegedly suffered damages as a result of purchasing products directly from suppliers or, alternatively, through intermediaries, which may complicate damage quantification and proof). [read post]
7 Aug 2013, 9:47 am
Dang alleged that the agreement violated Sherman Act Section 1 and sought injunctive relief on behalf of a nationwide class of indirect purchasers. [read post]
15 Nov 2010, 8:45 am
The complaint was filed on behalf of two classes -- direct purchasers of extra-sweet pineapples (retail stores such as Whole Foods and IGA) seeking both injunctive relief and treble damages, and indirect purchasers (consumers who purchased from the direct purchasers) seeking only injunctive relief. [read post]
23 Feb 2012, 1:26 pm
The indirect purchaser plaintiffs indirectly purchased TFT-LCD panels made by the defendants. [read post]
9 Dec 2009, 3:21 pm
Nov. 25, 2009), certified 28 indirect purchaser classes – one nationwide class for injunctive relief under section 16 of the Clayton Act and 27 separate indirect purchaser damages classes under the laws of Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Washington, West… [read post]
4 Feb 2013, 2:35 pm
One American academic has analysed all of the US indirect purchaser class certification decisions. [read post]
20 Aug 2021, 10:21 am
[That sounds … indirect.] [read post]
7 Aug 2013, 8:47 am
Dang alleged that the agreement violated Sherman Act Section 1 and sought injunctive relief on behalf of a nationwide class of indirect purchasers. [read post]
13 Jul 2020, 6:14 am
(plaintiff). [read post]
20 Apr 2009, 4:49 am
The district court held that plaintiff’s status as an indirect purchaser, impacted by tracing his alleged injury “through three levels of the supply chain - chipset manufacturers, device manufactures, and vendors,” was “too remote from Qualcomm’s alleged antitrust violations to support standing under the Clayton Act. [read post]
28 Jan 2013, 6:52 pm
Interestingly, one of the other defendant’s counsel raised the fact that indirect purchaser cases were due to be decided by the Supreme Court of Canada (that were heard last fall), which may have a bearing on this case (i.e., if there is no evidence of a direct purchaser in BC, the proceeding may ultimately be a nullity). [read post]
27 Jul 2012, 9:06 am
Where defendant appropriates the copyrighted work and sells it, a court will assume that the work triggered the purchase. [read post]
1 May 2018, 7:52 pm
The petition also asked what evidence must be put forth by a plaintiff seeking to rebut the presumption (Barclays PLC v. [read post]
28 Sep 2018, 11:58 am
In many other states, indirect purchasers couldn't recover damages from an antitrust violator, and since Qualcomm doesn't sell directly to consumers, this here is about indirect damages (because of device makers passing Qualcomm's supra-FRAND prices and fees through, which Judge Koh finds plaintiffs may be able to prove at trial):"[B]ased on the expert reports, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs have presented a methodology that… [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 7:47 am
The plaintiffs claimed that they lost business as the result of FNC’s misrepresentations because FNC was able to build a competing electronic database that lending institutions could choose in lieu of purchasing appraisal services from the plaintiffs. [read post]
2 Jul 2010, 8:04 am
Wild Law Group PLLC is interim lead counsel for the indirect purchaser class. [read post]
5 Apr 2018, 10:52 am
Plaintiff McCaffrey had a similar story.As indirect purchasers, plaintiffs had no breach of contract claims. [read post]
12 May 2015, 10:24 am
Cipro holds that reverse payment settlements can be challenged under California’s Cartwright Act, thereby reviving class actions filed by California indirect purchasers. [read post]
19 Dec 2012, 10:34 am
Consumers had standing, according to Judge Scheindlin, because plaintiffs alleged that the RSNs and MVPDs were co-conspirators, making consumers the first non-conspirator purchasers in the chain, and therefore not “indirect” purchasers within the meaning of Illinois Brick. [read post]
