A US District Judge finds that plaintiffs’ allegations can be sufficient to support their antitrust claim even if they failed to adequately define a cognizable market (Aluminum Warehousing)

In re: Aluminum Warehousing: Cats Live for Another Day* On March 26, 2015, U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest of the Southern District of New York, in a very colorful decision that metaphorically describes the plaintiffs as cats trying to locate a “rat” in the world of aluminum warehousing, denied defendants’ motion to dismiss in In re: Aluminum Warehousing Antitrust Litig. Aluminum is a multi-district litigation in which plaintiffs, a class of direct purchasers of aluminum and a group of other companies that purchase aluminum products, allege that defendants, a group of financial institutions that trade financial instruments tied to metals and operators of warehouses that store metals, conspired to increase their commodities trading profits and warehouse revenues. The defendants

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

Authors

  • Siemens (New York)
  • Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (New York)

Quotation

Deirdre McEvoy, Jennifer A. Dixon, A US District Judge finds that plaintiffs’ allegations can be sufficient to support their antitrust claim even if they failed to adequately define a cognizable market (Aluminum Warehousing), 26 March 2015, e-Competitions March 2015, Art. N° 72546

Visites 113

All issues

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