A US Court of Appeals finds that in order to allege a viable vertical restraint claim a plaintiff must plausibly allege the defendant’s market power (PSKS / Leegin Creative Leather Products)

Fifth Circuit Dismisses Leegin Resale Price Maintenance Case Anew, Following Supreme Court Remand* In 2007, the United States Supreme Court, updating the application of the cumulative advances in antitrust economics as applied to vertical restraint cases, overruled the venerable Dr. Miles Med. Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co., 220 U.S. 373 (1911). The Court held that because economic learning now demonstrates that there may be a number of procompetitive justifications for the imposition of vertically imposed resale price maintenance ("RPM"), such cases should now be evaluated under a rule of reason. See Leegin Creative Leather Prods., Inc. v. PSKS, Inc., 551 U.S. 877 (2007) ("Leegin"). The Supreme Court remanded Leegin back to the Fifth Circuit. Previously, the District Court for

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • Sheppard Mullin (Los Angeles)

Quotation

Don T. Hibner, A US Court of Appeals finds that in order to allege a viable vertical restraint claim a plaintiff must plausibly allege the defendant’s market power (PSKS / Leegin Creative Leather Products), 17 August 2010, e-Competitions August 2010, Art. N° 66630

Visites 159

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues